[Senate Hearing 114-612]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 114-612
NOMINATION HEARINGS
OF THE 114TH CONGRESS
=======================================================================
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
__________
FIRST SESSION--MARCH 10 THROUGH DECEMBER 2, 2015
SECOND SESSION--FEBRUARY 11 THROUGH SEPTEMBER 20, 2016
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
21-581 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
One Hundred Fourteenth Congress
BOB CORKER, TENNESSEE, Chairman
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
MARCO RUBIO, Florida BARBARA BOXER, California
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
CORY GARDNER, Colorado CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
DAVID PERDUE, Georgia TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
RAND PAUL, Kentucky TIM KAINE, Virginia
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
Todd Womack, Staff Director
Chris Lynch, Democratic Staff Director
Rob Strayer, Majority Chief Counsel
Margaret Taylor, Minority Chief Counsel
John Dutton, Chief Clerk
(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.]
----------
114th Congress--First Session
Tuesday, March 10, 2015 ......................................... 1
Stafford Fitzgerald Haney, of New Jersey, nominated to be
Ambassador to Costa Rica................................... 2
Matthew T. McGuire, of the District of Columbia, nominated to
be U.S. Executive Director of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development............................. 6
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 21
Gentry O. Smith, of North Carolina, nominated to be Director
of the Office of Foreign Missions.......................... 8
Charles C. Adams, Jr., of Maryland, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Finland...................... 10
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 23
Wednesday, March 25, 2015........................................ 25
Paul A. Folmsbee, of Oklahoma, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Mali....................................... 27
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 47
Mary Catherine Phee, of Illinois, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of South Sudan............................. 30
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 52
Cassandra Q. Butts, of the District of Columbia, nominated to
be Ambassador to the Commonwealth of the Bahamas........... 33
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 57
Katherine Simonds Dhanani, of Florida, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Somalia.............. 36
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 60
Tuesday, May 19, 2015 ........................................... 69
Miley Guilarte, of the District of Columbia, nominated to be
U.S. Alternate Executive Director of the Inter-American
Development Bank........................................... 71
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 106
Jennifer Ann Haverkamp, of Indiana, nominated to be Assistant
Secretary of State for Oceans and International
Environmental and Scientific Affairs....................... 74
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 109
Marcia Denise Occomy, of the District of Columbia, nominated
to be U.S. Director of the African Development Bank for a
term of five years......................................... 79
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 113
iii
Tuesday, May 19, 2015--continued
Sunil Sabharwal, of California, nominated to be U.S.
Alternate Executive Director of the International Monetary
Fund for a term of two years............................... 82
Brian James Egan, of Maryland, nominated to be Legal Adviser
of the Department of State................................. 84
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 117
Wednesday, May 20, 2015 ......................................... 125
Gregory T. Delawie, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Kosov................................... 126
Ian C. Kelly, of Illinois, nominated to be Ambassador to
Georgia.................................................... 131
Nancy Bikoff Pettit, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Latvia......................................... 133
Azita Raji, of California, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Kingdom of Sweden.......................................... 136
Julieta Valls Noyes, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Croatia................................. 139
Wednesday, June 17, 2015......................................... 157
Gayle Smith, of Ohio, nominated to be Administrator of the
U.S. Agency for International Development.................. 158
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 185
Tuesday, June 23, 2015........................................... 231
Glyn Townsend Davies, of the District of Columbia, nominated
to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Thailand................ 234
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 274
William A. Heidt, of Pennsylvania, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Kingdom of Cambodia................................. 237
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 275
Jennifer Zimdahl Galt, of Colorado, nominated to be
Ambassador to Mongolia..................................... 241
David Hale, of New Jersey, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Islamic Republic of Pakistan............................... 255
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 276
Alaina B. Teplitz of Illinois, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Federal Democratic Republic of Nepal................... 258
Sheila Gwaltney, of California, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Kyrgyz Republic........................................ 261
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 280
Atul Keshap, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to the
Republic of Maldives....................................... 263
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 282
Thursday, July 9, 2015 .......................................... 287
Hon. Michele Thoren Bond, of the District of Columbia,
nominated to be an Assistant Secretary of State (Consular
Affairs)................................................... 290
Dr. Sarah Mendelson, of the District of Columbia, nominated
to be Representative of the U.S. on the Economic and Social
Council of the U.N. and Alternate Representative of the
U.S. to the General Assembly of the U.N.................... 299
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 307
Wednesday, July 15, 2015 ........................................ 311
Hon. Roberta S. Jacobson, of Maryland, nominated to be
Ambassador to the United Mexican States.................... 313
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 339
Laura Farnsworth Dogu, of Texas, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Nicaragua............................... 315
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 360
Wednesday, July 15, 2015--continued
Perry L. Holloway, of South Carolina, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Cooperative Republic of Guyana........... 317
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 362
Peter F. Mulrean, of Massachusetts, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Haiti........................ 320
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 363
Wednesday, July 22, 2015 ........................................ 367
Hon. Paul Wayne Jones, of Maryland, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Poland....................... 371
Hon. Hans G. Klemm, of Michigan, nominated to be Ambassador
to Romania................................................. 373
Samuel D. Heins, of Minnesota, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Kingdom of Norway...................................... 376
James Desmond Melville, Jr., of New Jersey, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Estonia...................... 379
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 403
Kathleen Ann Doherty, of New York, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Cyprus.................................. 382
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 404
Thomas O. Melia, of Maryland, nominated to be an Assistant
Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International
Development................................................ 385
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 404
Thursday, July 30, 2015 ......................................... 415
Lucy Tamlyn, of New York, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Benin.......................................... 417
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 439
David R. Gilmour, of Texas, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Togolese Republic.......................................... 419
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 439
Jeffrey J. Hawkins, Jr., of California, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Central African Republic................. 422
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 440
Daniel H. Rubinstein, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Tunisia................................. 425
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 443
Carolyn Patricia Alsup, of Florida, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of the Gambia................... 428
Tuesday, August 4, 2015 ......................................... 445
Ann Calvaresi Barr, of Maryland, nominated to be Inspector
General, U.S. Agency for International Development......... 448
David Malcolm Robinson, of Connecticut, nominated to be an
Assistant Secretary of State (Conflict and Stabilization
Operations) and Coordinator for Reconstruction and
Stabilization.............................................. 451
Edwin Richard Nolan, Jr., of Massachusetts, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Suriname..................... 454
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 472
John L. Estrada, of Florida, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago........................ 457
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 473
Scott Allen, of Maryland, nominated to be U.S. Director of
the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development....... 460
Tuesday, September 22, 2015...................................... 475
Susan Coppedge, of Georgia, nominated to be Director of the
Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking................... 479
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 492
Thursday, October 1, 2015 ....................................... 497
Hon. Robert Porter Jackson, of Virginia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana........................ 499
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 523
Hon. Harry K. Thomas, Jr., of New York, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Zimbabwe..................... 502
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 524
Julie Furuta-Toy of Wyoming, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Equatorial Guinea.......................... 505
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 525
Dennis B. Hankins, of Minnesota, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Guinea.................................. 508
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 526
Linda I. Etim, of Wisconsin, nominated to be an Assistant
Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International
Development................................................ 510
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 527
Wednesday, October 28, 2015 ..................................... 557
John Morton, of Massachusetts, nominated to be Executive Vice
President of the Overseas Private Investment Corporation... 558
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 582
Kenneth Damian Ward, of Virginia, nominated to be U.S.
Representative to the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons........................................... 560
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 583
Hon. Peter William Bodde, of Maryland, nominated to be
Ambassador to Libya........................................ 563
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 583
Marc Jonathan Sievers, of Maryland, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Sultanate of Oman........................ 566
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 585
Elisabeth I. Millard, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Tajikistan.............................. 569
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 585
Thursday, October 29, 2015 ...................................... 587
Hon. Thomas A. Shannon, Jr., of Virginia, nominated to be an
Under Secretary of State (Political Affairs)............... 589
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 629
Laura S.H. Holgate, of Virginia, nominated to be the
Representative of the U.S. to the International Atomic
Energy Agency, and nominated to be Representative of the
U.S. of America to the Vienna Office of the United Nations. 609
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 644
Tuesday, November 3, 2015........................................ 657
The Hon. Deborah R. Malack of Virginia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Uganda....................... 659
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 677
Lisa J. Peterson, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Kingdom of Swaziland................................... 662
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 680
H. Dean Pittman, of the District of Columbia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Mozambique................... 665
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 681
Tuesday, December 1, 2015 ....................................... 685
Amos J. Hochstein, of the District of Columbia, nominated to
be an Assistant Secretary of State (Energy Resources)...... 687
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 726
Catherine Ebert-Gray, of Virginia,to be Ambassador to the
Independent State of Papua New Guinea, the Solomon Islands,
and the Republic of Vanuatu................................ 691
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 736
Hon. Scot Alan Marciel, of California, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Union of Burma........................... 693
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 737
Linda Swartz Taglialatela, of New York, nominated to be
Ambassador to Barbados, the Federation of St. Kitts and
Nevis, Saint Lucia, Antigua and Barbuda, the Commonwealth
of Dominica, Grenada, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. 706
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 745
John D. Feeley, of the District of Columbia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Panama....................... 709
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 749
Jean Elizabeth Manes, of Florida, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of El Salvador............................. 712
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 752
Todd C. Chapman, of Texas, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Ecuador........................................ 715
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 756
Wednesday, December 2, 2015 ..................................... 763
David McKean, of Massachusetts, nominated to be Ambassador to
Luxembourg................................................. 765
G. Kathleen Hill, of Colorado, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Malta...................................... 768
Eric Seth Rubin, of New York, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Bulgaria................................... 771
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 797
Kyle R. Scott, of Arizona, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Serbia......................................... 774
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 798
Carlos J. Torres, of Virginia, nominated to be Deputy
Director of the Peace Corps................................ 778
114th Congress--Second Session
Thursday February 11, 2016....................................... 801
Hon. Karen Brevard Stewart, of Florida, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of the Marshall Islands......... 804
Robert Annan Riley III, of Florida, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Federated States of Micronesia........... 808
Swati A. Dandekar, of Iowa, nominated to be U.S. Executive
Director of the Asian Development Bank..................... 812
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 829
Matthew John Matthews, of Oregon, nominated to be United
States Senior Official for the Asia-Pacific Economic
Cooperation, APEC, Forum................................... 814
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 831
Marcela Escobari, of Massachusetts, nominated to be an
Assistant Administrator of the United States Agency for
International Development.................................. 817
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 832
Thursday, March 10, 2016......................................... 839
Christine Ann Elder, of Kentucky, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of Liberia................................. 841
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 866
R. David Harden, of Maryland, nominated to be an Assistant
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development................................................ 844
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 871
Elizabeth Holzhall Richard, of Virginia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Lebanese Republic........................ 847
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 881
Stephen Michael Schwartz, of Maryland, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Somalia.............. 850
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 888
Kelly Keiderling-Franz, of Virginia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Oriental Republic of Uruguay............. 859
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 899
Mark Sobel, of Virginia, nominated to be United States
Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund for a
Term of Two Years.......................................... 861
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 905
Adam H. Sterling, nominated to be Ambassador to the Slovac
Republic................................................... 861
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 913
Wednesday, June 8, 2016.......................................... 921
Hon. Geeta Pasi, of New York, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Chad....................................... 923
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 935
Hon. Mary Beth Leonard, of Massachusetts, nominated to be
U.S. Representative to the African Union................... 925
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 939
Anne S. Casper, of Nevada, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Burundi........................................ 928
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 941
Tuesday, June 21, 2016........................................... 945
Anne Hall, of Maine, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Lithuania...................................... 946
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 986
Hon. Marie L. Yovanovitch, of Connecticut, nominated to be
Ambassador to Ukraine...................................... 950
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 992
Hon. Geoffrey R. Pyatt, of California, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Hellenic Republic of Greece.............. 953
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 995
Hon. Douglas Allan Silliman, of Texas, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Iraq......................... 965
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1004
Hon. Peter Michael McKinley, Virgina, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Federative Republic of Brazil............ 969
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1009
Lawrence Robert Silverman, of Massachusetts nominated to be
Ambassador to the State of Kuait........................... 971
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1019
Carol Z. Perez, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador to
the Republic of Chile...................................... 974
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1022
Wednesday, July 13, 2016......................................... 1029
Hon. Sung Y. Kim, of California, nominated to be Ambassador
to the Republic of the Philippines......................... 1030
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1047
Rena Bitter, of Texas, nominated to be Ambassador to the Lao
People's Democratic Republic............................... 1033
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1050
Amala Shirin Lakhdhir, of Connecticut, nominated to be
Ambassador to Malaysia..................................... 1036
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1052
Tuesday, September 20, 2016...................................... 1059
Hon. W. Stuart Symington, of Missouri, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Nigeria.............. 1061
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1079
Andrew Robert Young, of California, nominated to be
Ambassador to Burkina Faso................................. 1064
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1086
Joseph R. Donovan, Jr., of Virginia, nominated to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Indonesia.................... 1068
Responses to Additional Questions for the Record......... 1089
Index of nominees................................................ 1095
.
NOMINATIONS
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Stafford Fitzgerald Haney, of New Jersey, to be Ambassador to
Costa Rica
Matthew T. McGuire, of the District of Columbia, to be U.S.
Executive Director of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development for a term of two years
Gentry O. Smith, of North Carolina, to be Director of the
Office of Foreign Missions, and to have the rank of
Ambassador
Charles C. Adams, Jr., of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Finland
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:31 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. David Perdue,
presiding.
Present: Senators Perdue, Gardner, and Kaine.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID PERDUE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA
Senator Perdue. This hearing of the Senate Foreign
Relations Subcommittee on State Department Management will come
to order.
Thank you all for being here today to hear from the
nominees to very important positions that will allow these
Americans to proudly represent the United States abroad. We
have nominees for Ambassador to two countries, Costa Rica and
Finland, both of which we share strong diplomatic ties. Our
nominee for U.S. Executive Director for the International Bank
for Reconstruction and Development and Director of Office of
Foreign Missions, which remains very important as we seek to
secure our diplomatic facilities abroad and the Americans
working there.
I understand most of you have already been through this
process and are coming back for a second go-round. It is Cory's
and my first. So you will be patient with us today. Will you
not? [Laughter.]
However, I was not here last Congress. So I appreciate your
forbearance today, and we will move right through this as
expeditiously as we can.
With that, I would like to recognize Senator--I am sorry.
We will move right through this since he is not here.
Our first nominee--I am just going to highlight this just
briefly and apologize for this, but I want to go through this.
Our first nominee, Mr. Stafford Fitzgerald Haney, who is
nominated to be Ambassador to Costa Rica. Mr. Haney currently
serves as Director of Business Development and Client Services
at Pzena Investment Management, has served in positions with
Pepsico and Citibank in some major Latin American countries
such as Brazil, Mexico, and Puerto Rico. He graduated from
Georgetown University School of Foreign Service with a masters
and bachelors degree.
Our second nominee today is Mr. Matthew T. McGuire, who is
nominated to be U.S. Executive Director of the International
Bank for Reconstruction and Development for a term of 2 years.
Mr. McGuire has held multiple positions in the Department of
the Treasury and Commerce and prior to that, he had a very
successful career in the finance industry. Mr. McGuire is a
graduate of Brown University and has degrees from the
University of London and Harvard.
Our third nominee is Mr. Gentry O. Smith, who is nominated
to be Director of the Office of Foreign Missions with the rank
of Ambassador. Mr. Smith is a career Foreign Service officer
who started with the State Department in 1987. He has served in
many posts overseas, including Cairo, Tokyo, and Burma, as well
as the Secretary of State's protective detail. He also served
as Deputy Assistant Secretary and Assistant Director for
Countermeasures. Mr. Smith is a graduate of North Carolina
State University.
Our fourth nominee is Mr. Charles C. Adams, Jr., who is
nominated to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Finland.
Mr. Adams is currently senior counsel at Akin Gump Strauss
Hauer & Feld, LLP. He has led a successful career, spending
much of his time living in Geneva, Switzerland, as a managing
partner for various law firms. He is a graduate of Dartmouth
College and the University of Virginia School of law.
Thank you all for being here today and sharing your
thoughts and viewpoints with us today.
We would remind you all that your full statements will be
included in the record, as it was the last time you were here,
without objection. So if you could please keep your remarks to
no more than 5 minutes or so, we appreciate that so members of
the committee can engage with you on these matters. And we will
move as expeditiously as we can.
With that, we will take statements, starting with Mr. Haney
first, please.
STATEMENT OF STAFFORD FITZGERALD HANEY, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO COSTA RICA
Mr. Haney. Chairman Perdue, Senator Gardner, thank you. It
is an honor to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to serve as the next U.S. Ambassador to Costa Rica.
I am profoundly humbled by this opportunity to serve and
thank the President and the Secretary of State for the
confidence they have placed in me. If confirmed, I look forward
to working with you and your colleagues in Congress to protect
U.S. citizens in Costa Rica, deepen the bonds that unite our
countries, and advance U.S. interests in Central America.
With the chairman's permission, I would like to acknowledge
friends and family without whose support I would not be here
today, starting with my wife, Rabbi Andrea Haney, and my
children, Asher, Nava, Eden, and Shaia, who are at home
watching hopefully. If I am confirmed, my wife and our four
children will be joining me in San Jose, and it is only through
their love and support that I am here today.
I would also like to mention my mother, father, and
brother--may they rest in peace--who are here today with us in
our hearts. My mother, Sandra Haney, was and still is my hero.
She is also a link in a long line of family that has in various
ways served our country proudly. From a fifth great-granduncle
who fought in the Revolutionary War to my brother who served
both overseas and at home to my great uncle who recently
received an honorary doctorate in public service and was
recognized by the Tennessee State legislature to my mother's
marches and sit-ins to protest what she saw as injustices not
compatible with the America we aspire to be, we have a long and
proud tradition of serving our Nation. It is in my mother's
honor and in her memory that I hope, if I am confirmed, to
dedicate my service.
Costa Rica is an important ally in a region of critical
strategic importance to the United States. It is the most
stable democracy in Central America and its long-held
traditions of protecting human rights and freedom of expression
are a model for the region. Its strong commitment to investing
in education and health has helped Costa Rica achieve literacy,
life expectancy, infant morality, and income levels that are
significantly better than elsewhere in Central America. It is
no surprise that these positive attributes have attracted
significant numbers of Americans to the country. Today,
approximately 100,000 U.S. citizens call Costa Rica home and
more than 1 million visit annually. If confirmed, their safety
and well-being will be my top priority.
Despite its successes, Costa Rica, like its neighbors,
confronts many challenges, including security challenges, as
international drug trafficking organizations and organized
crime increasingly penetrate Central America. The United States
and Costa Rica enjoy an excellent partnership in security
cooperation. If confirmed, I will continue to work with the
Government of Costa Rica to ensure that organized crime does
not undermine the country's economy and democratic
institutions.
Another of my highest priorities will be promoting greater
Central American integration. As outlined in the Strategy for
U.S. Engagement in Central America, the region will not prosper
without better regional cooperation on trade, infrastructure
development, strengthened democratic institutions, energy
integration, and investment.
Given its ability and relative prosperity, Costa Rica can
and should play a critical role in advancing our strategy in
Central America. It can and should lead in working to create
conditions in Central America that are conducive to reducing
poverty and violence and creating jobs and opportunity, and it
should serve as an example of what is possible in the region.
President Solis has committed to working to promote regional
integration and prosperity, and if confirmed, I will support
him in those efforts.
I have many years experience living and working in
international business in Mexico, Central America, the
Caribbean, and Brazil. I understand the region and the
challenges it faces. As President Solis made clear during his
first year in office, Costa Rica is serious about improving its
business climate and attracting additional foreign investment.
If confirmed, my private sector experience will be an asset to
helping Costa Rica achieve those goals. It would also serve me
in working to advocate for stronger intellectual property
protection, promote entrepreneurship, and public-private
partnerships, and ensure that U.S. companies and investors
encounter a fair and level playing field for doing business in
Costa Rica.
If confirmed, I will work closely with Costa Rica to
advance the many other policy objectives and priorities the
United States and Costa Rica share. Costa Rica shares our
commitment to protecting democratic freedoms and human rights
and is vigilantly resisting any attempts to weaken the inter-
American human rights system. This support for basic human
rights, democracy, and freedom has never been more important in
the region than today. Costa Rica is an international leader
with important initiatives to mitigate and adapt to climate
change and promote renewable energy use and sustainable
development. I believe Costa Rica can become a regional hub of
innovation and has the potential to assume a leadership role in
advancing good governance and prosperity throughout Central
America.
As our dedicated team at Embassy San Jose states, a safe,
prosperous, and green Costa Rica not only benefits the citizens
of both of our nations, but also the entirety of Central
America.
Mr. Chairman, committee members, I thank you again for your
consideration of my nomination to serve as Ambassador to Costa
Rica, and I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Haney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Stafford Fitzgerald Haney
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the next
United States Ambassador to Costa Rica.
I am profoundly humbled by this opportunity to serve and thank the
President and the Secretary of State for the confidence they have
placed in me. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you and your
colleagues in Congress to protect U.S. citizens in Costa Rica, deepen
the bonds that unite our countries, and advance U.S. interests in
Central America.
With the chairman's permission, I would like to acknowledge friends
and family without whose support I would not be here today--starting
with my wife, Rabbi Andrea Haney, and my children Asher, Nava, Eden,
and Shaia. If I am confirmed, my wife and our four children will be
joining me in San Jose and it is only through their love and support
that I am here today. I would also like to acknowledge my mother-in-
law, Betsy Dobrick, my brothers and sisters-in-law Adam and Allison
Dobrick and Jeremy Dobrick and Tamara Hoover, and various close
friends, whose support means so much to me and my family.
Finally, I would also like to mention my mother, father, and
brother, may they rest in peace, who are here today with us in our
hearts. My mother, Sandra Haney, was, and still is, my hero. As a young
widow with two young children, she left home and family to provide my
brother and me with the best education and opportunities she could.
Working during the day and going to school at night, she showed us, by
her example, that the United States is truly the land of opportunity
for those who work hard on a level playing field. She did not have it
easy as a single African-American woman raising two children alone in
the 1970s, but she never gave up and she knew her sacrifices would
allow her children to have a better life. It was her firmly held
belief; one which she passed on, that America's core values should
serve as an example throughout the world. She also was a link in a long
line of family that has in various ways served our Nation proudly. From
a 5th great-granduncle who fought in the Revolutionary War to my
brother who served both overseas and at home to my greatuncle who
recently received an honorary doctorate in public service and was
recognized by the Tennessee State legislature to my mother's marches
and sit-ins to protest what she saw as injustices not compatible with
the America we aspire to be--we have a long and proud tradition of
serving our Nation. It is in my mother's honor and in her memory that I
hope, if I am confirmed, to dedicate my service.
Costa Rica is an important ally in a region of critical strategic
importance to the United States. It is the most stable democracy in
Central America, and its long-held traditions of protecting human
rights and freedom of expression are a model for the region. Its strong
commitment to investing in education and health has helped Costa Rica
achieve high literacy, life expectancy, and income levels and a low
infant mortality rate. It is no surprise that these positive attributes
have attracted significant numbers of Americans to the country. Today,
approximately 100,000 U.S. citizens call Costa Rica home and more than
1 million visit annually. If confirmed, their safety and well-being
will be my top priority.
Despite its successes, Costa Rica confronts many challenges,
including security challenges, as international drug trafficking
organizations and organized crime increasingly penetrate Central
America. The United States and Costa Rica enjoy an excellent
partnership in security cooperation. If confirmed, I will continue to
work with the Government of Costa Rica to ensure that organized crime
does not undermine the country's economy and democratic institutions.
If confirmed, another of my highest priorities will be promoting
greater Central American integration. As outlined in the Strategy for
U.S. Engagement in Central America, the region will not prosper without
better regional cooperation on trade, infrastructure development,
strengthened democratic institutions, energy integration, and
investment. Greater integration has long been an aspiration in Central
America, but effective mechanisms for achieving that goal have remained
elusive. The United States can play a constructive role in helping
Central America create jobs and economic opportunities for its 43
million people, by helping the region improve infrastructure, integrate
markets, reduce nontariff barriers, and benefit more from its free
trade agreement.
Given its stability and relative prosperity, Costa Rica can help
play a critical role in advancing our strategy in Central America. It
can help lead in working to create conditions in Central America that
are conducive to further reducing poverty and violence and creating
jobs and opportunity and it can serve as an example of what is possible
in the region. President Solis has stated a commitment to working to
promote regional integration and prosperity, and, if confirmed, I will
support him in those efforts. I will also work to create stronger
linkages between the American Chambers of Commerce in Central America,
so that the private sector is fully incorporated into the process of
seeking solutions to the region's development challenges.
I have many years' experience living and working in international
business in Mexico, Central America, the Caribbean, and Brazil. I
understand the region and the challenges it faces. As President Solis
made clear during his first year in office; Costa Rica is serious about
improving its business climate, and attracting foreign investment. If
confirmed, my private sector experience will be an asset in helping
Costa Rica advance in those areas. It will also serve me in working to
advocate for stronger intellectual property protection, promote
entrepreneurship and public-private partnerships, and ensure that U.S.
companies and investors encounter a fair and level playing field for
doing business in Costa Rica.
If confirmed, I will work closely with Costa Rica to advance the
many other policy objectives and priorities the United States and Costa
Rica share. Costa Rica shares our commitment to protecting democratic
freedoms and human rights, and is vigilantly resisting any attempts to
weaken the Inter-American Human Rights System. This support for basic
human rights, democracy and freedom has never been more important in
the region than today. Costa Rica is an international leader with
important initiatives to mitigate and adapt to climate change and
promote renewable energy use and sustainable development. I believe
Costa Rica can become a regional hub of innovation and has the
potential to assume a leadership role in advancing good governance and
prosperity throughout Central America.
As our dedicated team at Embassy San Jose states: a safe,
prosperous, and green Costa Rica not only benefits the citizens of both
of our nations, but also the entirety of Central America.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Haney.
Mr. McGuire.
STATEMENT OF MATTHEW T. McGUIRE, PH.D., NOMINATED TO BE U.S.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION
AND DEVELOPMENT
Dr. McGuire. Thank you, Chairman Perdue, and thank you for
convening us today and chairing this session. Thank you also to
Senator Kaine for presiding today. And, Senator Gardner, thank
you for coming. It seems appropriate that I congratulate
Senator Perdue and Senator Gardner for your recent victories
and for joining the Senate. It is quite an honor, and it is
always good to have fresh thinking and fresh blood up here.
I would also like to just thank my mother, who is here
today, Georgiana McGuire. I was noting earlier with a few
people that the last time I did this, I had aunts and uncles
and in-laws and all sorts of people. You do it a second time,
you get Mom. [Laughter.]
I am thrilled to have her, but it is a lesson to everybody
here.
It is an honor and a privilege, of course, to be here as
President Obama's nominee as Executive Director for the
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
otherwise known as the World Bank.
Rather than read the full statement I sent over for the
formal record, I would like to briefly discuss my career to
date and then frame how I would approach the role of Executive
Director, if I were to be confirmed.
So with that, I would just say that during the first part
of my career, I taught and was focused on issues related to
economic and development policy both in the United States and
abroad. I got a Ph.D. in anthropology from Harvard, finishing
in 1988, and my dissertation was on the redevelopment of public
housing in Chicago. During that time, I also spent several
months in Ethiopia and Eritrea researching the relationship
between those countries shortly after the end of their 30-year-
long war. And when I finished my Ph.D., I ran a welfare-to-work
job training program in New York before joining a firm that
helped U.S. cities redevelop public housing projects into
mixed-income communities.
In 2003, I moved into the financial services industry, and
I spent the next 8 years working for several mutual fund and
hedge fund companies raising capital and serving as a senior
executive in three entrepreneurial and dynamic firms. During
that time, I began to more fully understand the role that
financial markets play in our economy and how interconnected
the global economy is as a result of the ease with which
capital moves across national borders, industry sectors, and
asset classes. In an era where CEO's and investors can deploy
each dollar or euro or real almost anywhere in the world at
almost at a moment's notice, it is increasingly important that
countries like ours play close attention to their financial
positions and that they strive to maintain and strengthen the
integrity of their capital markets.
That view has been strengthened by my experience and my
time over the last 4 years at the Department of Commerce and at
the Department of the Treasury where I have worked closely with
U.S. businesses on a range of issues, including many related to
international trade.
Should this committee and the full Senate confirm me, I
will strive to be a sound steward of our country's capital at
the bank at all times. I will work to ensure that each dollar
we commit is used to support the values that have proven so
durable since America's founding, that open societies are the
strongest societies, that transparent systems are the most
successful systems, and that those countries which endeavor to
give all of their citizens a fair shot at becoming educated,
being healthy, and achieving economic independence are the
countries that will succeed no matter where they happen to be
located. Those are just a few of the values I have watched
President Obama champion for many years now, and I would be
honored to carry them forward on his behalf, on the country's
behalf as the Executive Director of the bank.
[The prepared statement of Mr. McGuire follows:]
Prepared Statement of Matthew T. McGuire
Thank you, Chairman Perdue and Senator Kaine, for presiding over
today's hearing. I would also like to thank Chairman Corker, Ranking
Member Menendez, and the distinguished members of the committee. It is
an honor and a privilege to be here, as President Obama's nominee for
Executive Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development. I have enjoyed meeting some of you and your staff during
the confirmation process, and I look forward to answering any questions
you might have.
My mother was part of the first Peace Corps group ever to go
overseas, ``Ghana I,'' back in 1961. She was the first person in her
family to go to college, having worked her way through, and when she
graduated she heard President Kennedy's call to reach out beyond
America's shores and to make a difference however small or however
large it might be. She taught English in a small town in Ghana called
Tema, and many years later a student of hers from the Tema Secondary
School became one of my professors at Brown University. As you might
imagine, I grew up hearing many stories about those sorts of
connections, and I grew up hearing about the importance of America's
role in the world, especially through its uniquely American
institutions, such as the Peace Corps. My father, who died when I was 6
years old, also served in the Peace Corps, in what was then East
Pakistan and is now Bangladesh. He spent most of his career working on
international affairs as well, and his influence on me has been
considerable even in his absence.
I also grew up working at my family's business here in Washington,
DC, The McGuire Funeral Service. My great-grandfather, Robert Grayson
McGuire, founded the funeral home in 1912, and when I was old enough I
began spending my summers and my weekends there, washing cars,
arranging flowers, shoveling snow off the driveway, and even acting as
a pallbearer when a family was in need of another set of hands. And I
will always remember that my mother and my uncle paid me minimum wage
and no more, punching a time clock like everyone else, for every hour
and every minute that I worked there.
Through the course of watching my grandfather, my mother, my aunt
and my uncle, run the funeral home, I learned numerous things. I
learned about how important it is to have a bank that provides credit
in bad times as well as good; about how having economic independence
makes it easier to engage with political issues of the day, like the
civil rights movement, which my family was deeply involved in; and
about the pride and responsibility that comes from being able to hire
more people as your company grows. These are simple, yet powerful
things that I carry with me to this day.
The first part of my career was squarely focused on issues of
economic equality, and how public policies can increase the
possibilities of ordinary citizens to raise their incomes and have a
shot at realizing their dreams. I got a Ph.D. in Anthropology from
Harvard, finishing in 1998, and my dissertation was on the
redevelopment of public housing in Chicago. During that time I also
spent several months in Ethiopia and Eritrea, researching the
relationship between those countries shortly after the end of their 30
year-long war. And when I finished my Ph.D., I ran a welfare-to-work
job training program in New York before joining a firm that helped U.S.
cities redevelop public housing projects into mixed-income communities.
In 2003, I moved into the financial services industry, and I spent
the next 8 years working for several mutual fund and hedge fund
companies, raising capital and serving as a senior executive in three
entrepreneurial and dynamic firms. During that time I began to more
fully understand the role that financial markets play in our economy,
and how interconnected the global economy is as a result of the ease
with which capital moves across national borders, industry sectors, and
asset classes. In an era where CEOs and investors can deploy each next
dollar, or euro, or real, almost anywhere in the world at almost a
moment's notice, it is increasingly important that countries like ours
pay close attention to their financial positions, and that they strive
to maintain and strengthen the integrity of their capital markets.
And that is what I would like to close with. If confirmed, you can
be sure that I will undertake the role of Executive Director with that
very sensibility in mind at all times. I will strive to be a sound
steward of our country's capital at the Bank, and I will work to ensure
that each dollar we commit is used to support the values that have
proven so durable since America's founding: that open societies are the
strongest societies; that transparent systems are the most successful
systems; and that those countries which endeavor to give all of their
citizens a fair shot at becoming educated, being healthy, and achieving
economic independence, are the countries that will succeed no matter
where they happen to be located. Those are just a few of the values I
have watched President Obama champion for many years now, and I would
be honored to carry them forward on his behalf, and on the country's
behalf, as Executive Director of the Bank.
I look forward to answering any questions you have, and I thank you
again for allowing me to come before you today.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. McGuire.
Mr. Smith.
STATEMENT OF GENTRY O. SMITH, NOMINATED
TO BE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF FOREIGN MISSIONS
Mr. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Kaine. I am
honored to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to be the next Director of the Office of Foreign Missions, OFM.
I am profoundly grateful for the confidence that the President
and Secretary Kerry have demonstrated in nominating me for this
unique and important position.
My entire professional life has been dedicated to public
service, beginning with my first career as a police officer in
Raleigh, NC, to my assignments at embassies in Tokyo, Rangoon,
and Cairo, and my most recent as the Deputy Assistant Secretary
for Countermeasures for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security. I
have strived in each to improve the conditions in which our
colleagues live and work. I believe my dedication and
commitment in this regard will serve me well, if given the
opportunity to lead the Office of Foreign Missions.
As an organization, its primary goals being to use
reciprocity to ensure the equitable treatment of U.S.
diplomatic and consular missions and personnel abroad,
regulating the activities of foreign missions in the United
States to protect our foreign policy and national security
interests, protecting our U.S. public against abuses of
privileges and immunities by foreign missions operating here in
the United States, and providing services and assistance to
foreign missions that are located here on a reciprocal basis.
As you are aware, OFM was established in 1982 under the
Foreign Missions Act. In passing the act, Congress made it
clear that the operations of foreign missions in the United
States are a proper subject for the exercise of Federal
jurisdiction.
For more than 30 years, the act guided the Department's
management and extension of foreign missions in the United
States for its privileges and benefits associated with
acquiring real property, motor vehicle and driving services,
for tax exemptions, customs clearances, domestic travel
courtesies and restrictions.
The committee is well aware of the Department's ongoing
efforts to ensure that our personnel abroad work in facilities
that are safe and secure and functional. I can authoritatively
attest that the relocation of an American Embassy is a complex
and challenging task. To accomplish this job, the United States
must have the interest and support of the host governments. In
many countries, such support is there for the asking. In
countries where the support is lacking, OFM plays a critical
role in assisting with the resolution of impasses we sometimes
face with foreign governments during our attempts to acquire
real property in those countries and relocating and
constructing our facilities.
When a country has an interest in improving or relocating
one of its missions in the United States, the Office of Foreign
Missions uses its ability to regulate the acquisition and the
use of real property by foreign missions as a leverage to
achieve the Department's own property-related needs in that
country. Without OFM and its authorities under the Foreign
Missions Act, we may not have been able to build a U.S. Embassy
in Beijing or a new annex that is currently under construction
there. This and more was achieved as a result of reciprocity
and the Foreign Missions Act.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I am honored to have the
opportunity to address you and the esteemed members of the
committee. And if confirmed, I will do all that I can to
further the important objectives that Congress has set out
under the Foreign Missions Act. I look forward to continuing to
work with you and to ensure the proper treatment of our foreign
personnel serving abroad and, as importantly, the foreign
missions that are here, that they continue to react as good
neighbors.
Thank you for the opportunity and your consideration for my
nomination, and I respectfully ask that my full statement be
entered into the record.
Senator Perdue. Without objection, it certainly will.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Smith follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gentry O. Smith
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 of the Office of Foreign Missions (OFM). I am
profoundly grateful for the confidence the President and Secretary
Kerry have demonstrated in nominating me for this unique and important
position.
My entire professional life has been dedicated to public service.
Beginning with my first career as a police officer in Raleigh, NC, to
my assignments at our Embassies in Tokyo, Rangoon, and Cairo, and to my
most recent role as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Countermeasures
in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, I have strived to improve the
conditions in which my colleagues live and work. I believe my
dedication and commitment in this regard will serve me well if given
the opportunity to lead the Office of Foreign Missions, an organization
whose primary goals are:
Using reciprocity to ensure equitable treatment for United
States diplomatic and consular missions abroad and their
personnel;
Regulating the activities of foreign missions in the United
States to protect our foreign policy and national security
interests;
Protecting the U.S. public from abuses of privileges and
immunities by members of the foreign missions; and
The provision of service and assistance to the foreign
mission community in the United States on a reciprocal basis.
As you are aware, OFM was established in 1982 as a requirement of
the Foreign Missions Act. In passing the act, Congress made it clear
that the operations of foreign missions in the United States are a
proper subject for the exercise of Federal jurisdiction.
For more than 30 years, the act has guided the Department's
management and extension to foreign missions in the United States,
privileges and benefits associated with the acquisition and use of real
property, motor vehicle and driving services, tax exemptions, customs
clearances, and domestic travel courtesies and restrictions.
In my estimation, the Foreign Missions Act is a landmark piece of
legislation which has positively influenced and conditioned the
environment in which U.S. diplomatic and consular missions abroad
operate.
This committee is well aware of the Department's ongoing efforts to
ensure that our personnel abroad work in facilities that are safe,
secure, and functional. I can authoritatively attest that the
relocation of an American Embassy is a complex and challenging task. To
accomplish this job, the United States must have the interest and
support of the host government. In many countries, such support and
assistance are there for the asking. In countries where support is
lacking, OFM plays a critical role in assisting with the resolution of
impasses we sometimes face with foreign governments during our attempts
to acquire real property in their countries for the relocation and
construction of our facilities.
When a country has an interest in improving or relocating one of
its missions in the United States, OFM uses its ability to regulate the
acquisition and use of real property by foreign missions as leverage to
achieve the Department's own property-related needs in that country.
Without OFM and the authorities it has under the Foreign Missions Act,
we may not have been able to build the new U.S. Embassy in Beijing, or
the new annex building under construction there. This and more was
achieved as a result of reciprocity and the Foreign Missions Act.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, I am honored to have the opportunity to
address you and the esteemed members of the committee. If confirmed, I
will do all that I can to further the important objectives Congress set
out in the Foreign Missions Act, and I look forward to continuing to
work with you to ensure proper treatment of our Foreign Service
personnel abroad, and that foreign missions are good neighbors here at
home.
Thank you for this opportunity and your consideration of my
nomination. I respectfully request that my full statement be entered
into the record, and I will be happy to answer your questions.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Smith.
Mr. Adams.
STATEMENT OF CHARLES C. ADAMS, JR., NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND
Mr. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Senator
Kaine, it is a renewed pleasure to have the opportunity of
appearing today before this committee. It is a tremendous honor
to have been renominated by the President for this post, and I
thank both the President and Secretary Kerry for the confidence
that they have shown in me. If confirmed, I very much look
forward to working with you and with your colleagues in
Congress to further U.S. interests in Finland.
Mr. Chairman, with your kind permission, I would like to
say a few words--to repeat a few words actually that I said on
a previous occasion with respect to the reasons why for me, if
confirmed, the privilege of serving as an Ambassador of the
United States has deep personal significance.
My late father, Charles C. Adams, dedicated the entirety of
his professional career to representing the United States as an
officer of the Foreign Service, supported throughout by my late
mother, Florence Schneider Adams. They, and what came over time
to be a family of six children, spent many years in posts
around the world with stints in between back home here in
Washington, principally in Europe and Africa. And so I had the
opportunity as a Foreign Service brat to witness firsthand from
the perspective of a kid at the time the enormous skill and
savvy and dedication and personal courage that my parents
brought to their service to their country, as did also all of
the other men and women of the Foreign Service with whom they
were privileged to serve. And I saw also the burdens and the
sacrifices that they were prepared to endure in serving their
country.
Now, after my own service in the Peace Corps in East Africa
from 1968 to 1970, I chose to go into the private sector, and I
spent more than 40 years in the practice of international law
and policy at high levels. But throughout this time, I have
always had very close to my heart the idea that as a salute to
the memory of my mom and dad and to the magnificent men and
women of the Foreign Service with whom they served that I, in
turn, might some day be afforded the profound privilege of
serving my country as an ambassador of the United States.
And I have to say that in the 6 months of a holding
pattern, in effect, since I last had the privilege of appearing
before this committee, the sentiment on my part, far from
having in any way been diluted or diminished, has in fact, been
reinforced. And so I do thank you very much, indeed, for the
opportunity of reappearing before this committee today.
I am very excited that the President should have asked me
to represent the United States in Finland. Finland is a very
close partner of the United States. It has been a member of the
European Union since 1995, has developed an innovation-led
economy, has worked very closely with the United States as a
partner in the Partnership for Peace of NATO, and has supported
the United States in Afghanistan and elsewhere in promoting
human rights and security around the globe.
As to the matter of shared security, ever since 1950
Finland has been a very dedicated participant in U.N.
peacekeeping missions around the world, and although not a
member of NATO, it is, as I have mentioned, a participant in
NATO's Partnership for Peace program. And Finland maintains a
very high level of cooperation and interoperability with the
NATO alliance. It regularly participates in joint training
missions with the United States and its allies, including joint
air training later this very month with Sweden and Estonia and
the United States Air Forces.
And Finland is one of the largest contributors to the OSCE
special monitoring mission in Ukraine with 19 observers on the
ground currently and very substantial contributions as well to
the observation force in respect of the Ukraine elections last
year.
The Finnish Government has also contributed troops to the
Resolute Support mission in Afghanistan, has suffered
fatalities, along with others of our allies, and it has pledged
$1 billion a year from 2015 through 2017 in further support of
the Afghan National Security Forces. Finland has also taken the
lead on the implementation of U.N. Security Council Resolution
1325 in respect of women's rights and participation of women in
Afghan civil society.
Secondly, the United States and Finland share the vision of
a strong, robust transatlantic economy that delivers benefits
for all of our citizens. That is why, if confirmed, one of my
very top priorities will be increasing economic cooperation
between our two countries through expanded bilateral trade and
investment. The United States is currently Finland's fourth-
largest customer and sixth-largest supplier with bilateral
trade valued in excess of $7 billion. I believe that we can do
still more and enhance the position of the United States as a
principal valued trading partner of Finland.
I will work closely also with the Finns on the increasing
importance of the Arctic region. As you know, the United States
is about to take over, on April 25, the chairmanship of the
Arctic Council, and the Finns will have the next succeeding
chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2018 to 2019.
As to our shared values, the United States and Finland have
a relationship which continues to thrive because of the strong
people-to-people ties between our two nations. And these
relationships are the lifeblood of our partnership. I can
recall having had, as a college student at Dartmouth, a summer
job as an escort interpreter with the Department of State, and
I had the occasion to participate in the international visitors
program as an interpreter with delegations from abroad. And it
happens that Finland, in participating in these IVP programs
over the years, now has as alumni many senior members of the
Finnish Government, including President Niinisto, Prime
Minister Stubb, and other important figures in Finland's
Government who came to see the United States as young students
at the time.
Senator Perdue. I apologize for interrupting. Could we move
to a conclusion so we can move this along? I apologize. I am
trying to keep us on schedule here. Thank you.
Mr. Adams. Well, I thank you for your attention.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Adams follows:]
Prepared Statement of Charles C. Adams, Jr.
Mr. Chairman and honorable members of the committee, it is a
privilege to appear before you today as the President's nominee to be
Ambassador to the Republic of Finland. It is a tremendous honor to be
asked to serve in this post, and I would like to thank President Obama
and Secretary Kerry for their confidence in me. If confirmed, I look
forward to working with you and your colleagues in Congress to further
U.S. interests in Finland.
With your kind permission, I would like to say a few words about my
personal background and why this makes the privilege to serve as an
ambassador so meaningful, if confirmed by the Senate.
My late father, Charles C. Adams, dedicated the entirety of his
professional career to representing the United States as a Foreign
Service officer, supported throughout by my late mother, Florence
Schneider Adams. They, and what came over time to be a family of six
children, spent many years in posts all over the world, principally in
Europe and Africa, between assignments back home here in the United
States. I had the opportunity to witness at first hand, through the
eyes of the ``Foreign Service brat'' that I was, the enormous skill,
savvy, dedication, and courage that my parents, and all other
professionals of the Foreign Service, brought to their service to their
country, and the burdens and sacrifices they were prepared to endure.
After service in the Peace Corps in East Africa in 1968-1970, I
chose to enter the private sector, and have practiced international law
and policy at high levels for now over 40 years. But I have always had
close to my heart the idea that, as a salute to the memory of my mom
and dad, and to the magnificent men and women of the Foreign Service
with whom they served, I might someday be afforded the extraordinary
privilege of serving my country as a United States Ambassador.
My feelings in this regard have in no way diminished; rather they
have intensified in the 6 months since having first shared these
remarks with this distinguished committee.
I am very excited that the President asked me to represent the
United States in Finland. Finland is a close U.S. partner. It has been
a member of the European Union since 1995, has developed an innovation-
led economy, engages closely with us as a NATO partner, including in
Afghanistan, and leads in promoting human rights around the globe.
Finland and its EU partners have stood with the U.S. in
implementing sanctions against Russia, sharing our belief that Russia
must be held accountable for its actions in Ukraine and abide by its
commitments under the Minsk Agreement.
Participation in multilateral fora is a core component of Finland's
foreign policy and this is demonstrated through its partnership with
the U.S. in international organizations like the United Nations and the
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe.
If confirmed, I will work to sustain and advance the strong U.S.-
Finland bilateral relationship. I will work to do so by championing
U.S. national interests across three areas: our shared security, shared
prosperity, and shared values.
First, on our shared security: ever since the 1950s, Finland has
been a dedicated participant in U.N. peacekeeping missions around the
world. At the 2014 NATO summit in Wales, Finland became an Enhanced
Partner of the alliance. Finland has been a participant in NATO's
Partnership for Peace program for years and maintains a high level of
cooperation and interoperability with the alliance. Finland regularly
participates in joint training missions with the U.S. and our allies,
including joint air training later this month, and is one of the
largest contributors to the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) in
Ukraine, contributing 19 SMM observers.
The Finnish Government has contributed troops to the Resolute
Support Mission in Afghanistan, and has pledged $8 million per year
from 2015 to 2017 in support for the Afghan National Security Forces.
Finland has taken the lead on implementation of UNSCR 1325, the
Resolution for Women, Peace and Security, which seeks to protect
women's rights and participation in Afghan society.
Finland also played a critical role in addressing the crisis in
Syria through its participation in the mission to transport and destroy
Syrian chemical weapons and in 2014 provided over $14 million in
humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people.
Finland has demonstrated a commitment to combating violent
extremism in partnership with the United States, having implemented
enhanced antiterrorism legislation in January and participating in the
Foreign Terrorist Fighters Working Group.
Second, the United States and Finland share the vision of a strong,
robust transatlantic economy that delivers benefits for all our
citizens. That is why, if confirmed, one of my top priorities will be
increasing economic cooperation between our two countries, through
expanded bilateral trade and investment.Finland strongly supports a
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP), which, if
successfully negotiated, could further increase bilateral economic ties
and strengthen the overall U.S.-EU economic relationship. I will also
work closely with the Finns on the increasingly important Arctic
region. Finland is eager to work with us on our upcoming chairmanship
of the Arctic Council, and will take over the chairmanship after us in
2017.
Finally, on our shared values, the U.S.-Finnish relationship
continues to thrive because of the strong people-to-people ties between
our two nations. These relationships are the lifeblood of our
partnership. If confirmed, I will travel throughout the country meeting
with students, media, local officials and civil society listening to
their priorities and concerns and speaking to the enduring value of our
cooperation.
Finland has played an active role in advancing our shared security,
economic, and social values. If confirmed, I look forward to
representing my country in advancing a still deeper connection between
the United States and Finland.
I am grateful for the opportunity to have addressed you today, and
am at your disposal to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Senator Perdue. No. They are very eloquent remarks. I
apologize for closing that off.
It must be easier the second time, guys. You did very well.
As we said in the opening remarks, this is the second time
you have been here. I appreciate your forbearance.
I have a couple questions of my own here for the record,
and then we will move to the ranking member, Senator Kaine, for
his remarks and questions as well. I will try to be brief. I
appreciate your forbearance today. And I am glad your mom is
here, Mr. McGuire.
Dr. McGuire. Thank you, sir.
Senator Perdue. Mr. Haney, as Ambassador to Costa Rica,
what would your top policy priorities be as you approach that
country? It is one of the shining stars, as you said, in
Central America, indeed Latin America. And what can we do to
raise our cooperation together to the next level?
Mr. Haney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the question.
I think the broad policy objectives that I would have in
Costa Rica very much mirror--align with the broader objectives
we have within Central America as they were recently outlined
in the Strategy for U.S. Engagement in Central America.
So specifically one would be promoting prosperity and
economic integration from a regional perspective, enhancing
security, as well as promoting improved governance. And I think
Costa Rica can both benefit from our focus on these areas, as
well as help us do some of the heavy lifting that we need in
the region.
So, for example, on the prosperity and regional
integration, Costa Rica has done fairly well relatively. As you
said, it is a shining star within the region and within Latin
America. It is 40 percent of the trade of the CAFTA-DR, the
free trade agreement within the region. But there are still
other areas that they can take advantage of within this trade
intraregionally, and to do that, they need to address things
such as the high cost of power, as well as the transportation
infrastructure and facilitating trade on an intraregional
basis. I think that is an overlapping priority that we have
with the Solis government and that is something that we could
work on with them.
As far as enhancing security goes, Costa Rica has done an
excellent job. Coming from the private sector, I always look at
return on investment. So what does the U.S. taxpayer get for
the investment we are making in our partner countries? And
Costa Rica, by far, has probably done one of the best jobs in
the region on security cooperation. Last year, they seized more
cocaine than any other country in Central America, and it was
30 percent more than the previous year. In the last 4 years, it
has continued to grow up. So I think we can continue to work on
security with the Costa Ricans.
And then I think very much and very importantly for Costa
Rica and for the United States is that our relationship is at a
different level now. It has matured to the point where we look
at Costa Rica as an asymmetrical partner in helping us address
some of the key issues in the region. And so I would hope to be
able to help the Costa Ricans, perhaps do some of the
initiative-building activity that they can do to take some of
their experience in promoting human rights and democracy,
education, as well as economic development and transport that
to the rest of the region as well.
Senator Perdue. Thank you.
Mr. McGuire, what is your impression of the coordination
between the World Bank and the regional development banks? More
broadly, in light of the request of the general capital
increases from these institutions, what do you see as the
division of labor between these institutions, and how should
Congress think about and prioritize those requests?
Dr. McGuire. Sure. So on the first of those questions, the
coordination there--it is ongoing. It is consistent. The World
Bank, obviously, is considerably larger than the others, the
African Development Bank, the Inter-American, the Asian
Development Bank, the European Development Bank. And so there
is always a discussion back and forth, and as many people have
explained it to me, people often take the World Bank's lead. So
the practices and the policies of the bank are quite
consequential in terms of the practices of some of the others.
Certainly, were I to be confirmed, I already know some of
the other executive directors, at least the executive director
at the Inter-American Development Bank. I know the woman who
has been nominated for the African Development Bank. I
certainly look forward to maintaining and strengthening those
relationships and then making sure that staff are talking where
and how it is appropriate as well. So that is the first piece.
In terms of the division of labor, the World Bank has
extraordinary expertise in any number of countries around the
world. That said, one can always get even more expertise from
those who are on the ground who are focusing just on a
particular region. And so certainly I would expect for an
intellectual exchange.
In terms of projects themselves, I think that is a
discussion that should be an ongoing one, and there are certain
banks which have greater expertise in certain areas, let us
say, on financial reform or education. The bank has a
particularly strong team thinking about infrastructure and
public health, and I think we ought to play to our strengths
and make sure that we are not just overlapping all the time but
that we are complementary in how projects fit with one another.
And then there are instances where there are particular
projects that are larger, perhaps a little riskier, where we
actually do want to be alongside one another to spread out some
of that risk and to make sure that we are really utilizing the
U.S.'s contributions to all the banks most effectively.
Senator Perdue. Thank you very much.
Mr. Smith, what do you consider to be the OFM's highest
priorities, and how do you perceive your potential role in
achieving them. You have served in the State Department as
Deputy Assistant Secretary and Assistant Director for
Countermeasures in the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, since
2009 I think.
Mr. Smith. That is correct.
Senator Perdue. How do you perceive your role in achieving
those priorities?
Mr. Smith. Senator, as I stated during my previous
testimony here, my highest priority will be ensuring the
equitable treatment of our personnel who serve in facilities
abroad by the host governments under which they operate and
also make sure that our national interests and foreign policy
interests here in the United States are protected by regulating
the activities of those foreign missions that are located here
in the United States.
How I will do that is by remaining engaged with the various
regional bureaus at the State Department, along with their
regional executive directors, who have day-to-day interaction
with our embassies and consulates that are around the world to
make sure that any issues that come up that we can address from
a perspective of reciprocity that we can do that.
I will also, of course, stay in close contact with the
Under Secretary for Management and the chiefs of missions at
those embassies so that if I personally have to be engaged in
any of those activities to bring about resolution, that I can
do that as well.
And as I stated during my last testimony, of course, I will
remain engaged with the Congress, with the members here, and
with your committees if there are specific issues of interest
that we can resolve as well.
Senator Perdue. Great. Thank you.
My time has expired. In the second round, I have one more
question for Mr. Adams, but the ranking member--we are going to
waive the time constraint on this since he has not had a chance
for his opening remarks.
So, Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And thanks to all the
witnesses.
I have voted for you once already. So I am not going to ask
questions and make you think I am trying to satisfy myself of
whether I made a mistake or not. I very much support you. I
congratulate you on the renomination.
I also want to say, Mr. Adams, your story about your own
family's personal history is a very touching one. But it really
does call to mind the tremendous sacrifice that our Foreign
Service professionals make. The three of you, I guess, will
have the title of Ambassador, and then, Mr. McGuire, you will
be Executive Director. But you are all Ambassadors, but you
also will be working with some fantastic small A ambassadors.
As I travel to do CODEL's as part of this committee, when I
am in another country, I almost always will meet with first-
and second-tour Foreign Service officers, the newcomers to the
State Department family to ask them about their lives and their
perceptions and to answer their questions. I always come back--
Senator Cornyn and I were in Latin America 3 weeks ago. I
always come back with a high degree of real inspiration for the
service. I think we do a good job of thanking our military who
serve in harm's way these days, but an awful lot of our
nonmilitary personnel who serve overseas who get sent to places
that may not be their first choice, sometimes to places where
they cannot bring family, sometimes to places where there is
physical danger--it is really important work. And so you will
be working with wonderful colleagues, and I know that you will
express that appreciation to them every day that you serve.
To just maybe go left to right, Mr. Adams, I want to ask
you about--we had a hearing this morning about Russia and the
Ukraine. We have had a lot of hearings about Russia in the
months since you were here and about what is happening. Talk a
little bit about the Finland-Russia relationship now and, in
particular, whether the sanctions that the United States and
NATO have imposed on Russia are having an effect on the economy
of Finland.
Mr. Adams. Thank you, Senator. Let me address the second
part of your question first, if I may.
Finland, as you know, is a very strong proponent of the
sanctions regime against Russia and has implemented those
sanctions forcefully. Even though, inasmuch as Finland has a
very active trading relationship with Russia, it is Finland
which, among the EU countries, has probably paid the highest
price in terms of the impact on its economy. Finland's exports
to Russia in 2014 were down by 13 percent in respect of 2013,
largely as a result of the direct sanctions and of the reduced
value of the ruble which impeded Russian purchasing power in
respect to Finnish goods and services. Finland has stepped up
and has made it clear that it is prepared not only to enforce
existing sanctions but to advocate for enhanced and stronger
sanctions to the extent that the crisis in Ukraine is not
rapidly brought to a satisfactory close.
The relationship between Finland and Russia is ancestral.
As you know, Finland spent over a century as a grand duchy of
the czar of Russia from 1809 to December 6th of 1917. There had
been dealings before. There have been dealings after, including
armed conflict, as you know. In the course of the Second World
War, Finland on two separate occasions staved off the assaults
of the Red Army, incurring the admiration of the world in so
doing.
It is a delicate relationship. Finland is very firmly
anchored with the West in terms of its values, in terms of its
liberal political system, its democracy, in terms of also of
its sense of oneness with its neighbors to the west and to the
south, even as Finland has sought to maintain a relationship
with Russia that is based on shared respect and a concern for
good neighborly proximity, and Finland has succeeded admirably
in so doing.
The crisis in the Ukraine has brought focus on Finland as
an interlocutor and bearer of messages to Russia which are
heeded and paid close attention to by Russia because of the
privileged posture of Finland and the respect with which
Finland is held by Russia due to this relationship of several
centuries standing. And if confirmed, I would look forward to
working closely with the Finnish Government in continuing to
strive for a satisfactory and prompt resolution of the crisis
in Ukraine to which Finland is uniquely positioned to
contribute.
Senator Kaine. Thank you very much, Mr. Adams.
Mr. Smith, the issue of the reciprocal treatment of U.S.
Embassy and consular personnel in nations where they serve and
then our treatment of their personnel here--there have been
some newsworthy instances in the last couple years, most
notably in some back and forth between the United States and
India with respect to treatment of Indian Embassy and consular
personnel in New York and then actions taken in India that
challenged some of the rights of our Embassy personnel.
But one that is ongoing right now that I am just kind of
curious about--I just returned from Latin America with Senator
Cornyn, and when we were in Colombia, there was an escalating
tension with the neighboring country of Venezuela. And my
understanding is that Venezuela has sort of directed us to
reduce our number of Embassy and consular personnel from--I do
not know--about 100 down to 17. There are about 80 Venezuelan
consular personnel in the United States. I am just curious if
you have any insight that you can share in an opening setting
as to how we are trying to work through that particular
challenge to the credentials to our Embassy and consular
personnel in Venezuela.
Mr. Smith. Well, as you stated, Senator, as much as we can
talk about it in open session, which is rather limited, but I
agree with you. We got the number that we needed to reduce down
to 17. We are looking at the situation now because, as you
stated, there are more than 17 diplomats from Venezuela that
are currently operating in the United States. And so we will
continue in negotiations and discussions with the Government of
Venezuela to come to a much more honest recognition of how many
personnel they have here and hopefully be able to respond in a
reciprocal way so that we can keep our numbers pretty much
equal to what their numbers are. So it is still a situation
that is developing. It is one that is still very much under
study with the Department and one in which we remain engaged
with the Venezuelans on this particular issue.
Senator Kaine. Great. Thank you, Mr. Smith, for that.
Mr. McGuire, I want to ask you about the activities of the
IBRD in the Americas. The President currently has a budget
proposal in that is Plan Central America. It is with respect to
the Northern Triangle countries in Central America, Honduras,
Guatemala, and El Salvador. The dramatic escalation in the
number of unaccompanied minors coming to the United States, an
average of about 20,000 to 35,000 in 2013, nearly 70,000 in
2014, drew a lot of attention to these three countries that
have three of the worst murder rates in the world, huge amounts
of poverty. And the President's proposal deals with kind of an
all-encompassing strategy to help them deal with security
challenges, fight narcotrafficking, and also do the kind of
economic development and justice reforms that will enable the
people to want to stay rather than to have to leave their
countries due to poverty and violence.
Talk a little bit about the IBRD kind of portfolio. It
looks to be about a third of activity is in the Americas. How
can the IBRD be an asset to this need to hopefully upgrade the
security and economic situation in Central America so we do not
see the push of unaccompanied minors coming to our country.
Dr. McGuire. Sure. I appreciate it. And I was actually in
Colombia just last summer on a trade mission with the Commerce
Department, and so I thought about a number of these issues
from a regional perspective myself recently.
I would say the first place I would start is importantly to
your point, realizing that there is an all-in strategy here in
the sense that on certain matters it will be the State
Department which is able to take the lead and help the Northern
Triangle countries in particular. In certain instances, it is
USAID on the bilateral side. It is worth noting that 11 of the
21 countries with which the United States has free trade
agreements are in this hemisphere. All three of the Northern
Triangle countries we have free trade agreements with. So there
is an existing strong base there for increasing commerce, which
leads to increasing stability.
That is really the part and parcel of what the World Bank
is about, is stabilizing economies, growing economies so that a
lot of other problems often can fade away so long as you are
paying attention to them a little more directly like security
and some of the things that you are addressing. So I think that
is important to realize. There is a larger context here and
this is an ongoing set of challenges that we are dealing with.
In terms of the IBRD, you are right. I believe it is closer
to a quarter of the overall portfolio is within Latin America.
So that is pretty significant. I would note that the two large
economies within the region, the largest, Brazil and Mexico,
are number one and number two in terms of total portfolio
exposure, if you will, at the bank. So there is consistent and
ongoing work. And I think the challenge for the bank is to
continue to look at where it can have the greatest impact.
One example I will use--and please take it not as a
recommendation to bank staff where they ought to go. But when I
was in Colombia, one of the things I heard an awful lot about
is the great potential that the eastern region had for
developing agriculture. It is very fertile land. One of the big
challenges that they have is, should that be fully developed,
there are not enough roads and rail to get to market in the
more densely populated regions to the west but also for export.
And so these sorts of infrastructure projects could be
something that would make a difference. Again, I am not making
recommendations but saying these are the kind of things that
the bank and its expert staff continue looking at to say how do
we grow the economy, how do we diversify the economy, how do we
give people multiple options so perhaps they are not drawn into
some of the other activities that are going on down there.
And then finally, I would say, getting back to my original
point, it is working in conjunction with all the other U.S.
Government entities to make sure that we are working hand in
hand and not at cross purposes so we can be most effective in
trying to stabilize the region and help it to continue to grow.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. McGuire.
And finally, Mr. Haney, I want to congratulate you. On this
CODEL I was talking about, we spent about 35 minutes in the
airport in Costa Rica, and the mere knowledge that we were
there caused Embassy officials to drive and meet with us in our
layover and ask us penetrating questions about when Fitz Haney
was going to be confirmed by the Senate of the United States.
And I thought if they drove all the way out to the airport
about an hour from downtown knowing we would have 5 minutes to
talk on your behalf, that speaks well for the team that you
will be working with.
Costa Rica, a fascinating country; 120,000 American
citizens, approximately, live there and more than 1 million
Americans visit Costa Rica every year.
As we are grappling with some of the issues I asked Mr.
McGuire about some of the security challenges in Central
America, really two things. What can we do to help Costa Rica
share some of its expertise, civil justice system, for example,
in Honduras--I am very familiar with Honduras, having lived
there. One out of 100 murders leads to a conviction. So there
is almost complete impunity for the most serious crime there
is, and that means people do not cooperate with the courts or
police. Why be a witness? Why tell somebody what you saw if
there is not going to be a conviction anyway? And that is a
fairly common thing in Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala. Costa
Rica has a different tradition. I am interested in what you
might be able to do to help sort of share that tradition in the
region because of the cultural similarities.
But also, I am curious. Is Costa Rica seeing any up-tick in
criminal activity? There is a little bit of a squeezing the
balloon phenomenon. The better we do in Colombia, the more we
push some criminal activity elsewhere. When we invest in Plan
Merida in Mexico, we push some criminal activity elsewhere. Is
Costa Rica seeing any escalation, especially in narcotraffic,
and what might the United States do to help them deal with that
issue?
Mr. Haney. Thank you, Senator. And thanks to the team in
Embassy San Jose who drove out to advocate on my behalf. I hope
to be down there soon.
Let me start with the second part of your question. I do
think that is the importance of the entire approach, both from
the U.S. Government perspective, as well as the strategic
perspective that we have to address this on a regional basis.
Because of the success we have had in Colombia and success we
have had in Mexico, being a business person, my belief is that
as people develop distribution channels, they are going to ship
through whatever they think they can make money on. And so the
countries in the middle, so all of Central America, have been
squeezed and have all experienced an up-tick or increase in
violence. And Costa Rica has not been spared that up-tick. Last
year, the murder rate went back up in Costa Rica, and it was
most directly related to narcotrafficking.
So I think the fact that the country has, like I said,
seized more drugs last year than any other country in the
region--and that was a 30-percent increase over the previous
year, and it has been 4 years in a row--tells, I think, one of
two things. One is that the Costa Ricans are a very willing and
capable partner, and we need to continue to partner with them
on initiatives around security. And two, probably other
countries are not doing as well as they should do if Costa Rica
is number one in this. So I think they are exposed, and we can
do everything we can to continue to support their democratic
institutions so that they cannot become as tainted or as
fragile as the Northern Triangle institutions are.
Now, what can Costa Rica do? I do think that Costa Rica,
given its strong traditions and given its relative success on
democracy and human rights, can serve to help institution-build
within the region. And so I think our engagement--you know, we
have not had an ambassador in Costa Rica now for almost 2
years, and I think our high-level engagement with the
Government of Costa Rica will help them really to move to the
next level. It is a natural impulse, I think, of the Solis
government. President Solis has said that Costa Rica cannot
prosper if the rest of the region is not prospering as well.
And I think that is a shift in mindset that the Costa Ricans
have come to as of late, but I think that we need to do
everything we can to help them continue on that path.
And so one of my priorities will be engaging both the Costa
Rican Government, as well as broader civil society really,
because Costa Rica has a very deep and broad civil society, and
see how can we bring training and other things, from a judicial
standpoint, some of the things that we have helped, actually
Costa Rica with, through some of the CARSI funding we have done
over the last 5 years to really export that expertise to the
Northern Triangle to really help and help the Costa Ricans
continue to realize that helping the Northern Triangle is
actually helping them as well.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have no further
questions, and thanks to all the witnesses.
Senator Perdue. Thank you.
I just have a quick question, Mr. Adams, for the record. As
you think about taking on this responsibility--and let me echo
the ranking member's comment about your story. That is very
touching.
As you think about, though, taking on this responsibility,
how do you see the priorities? What will be your main focus as
you take on this responsibility?
Mr. Adams. Senator Perdue, I think that the first priority
for any United States Ambassador has to be the safety and the
security of embassy personnel and of U.S. citizens at large in
the particular country. And certainly this is something that,
if confirmed, I will have foremost in my mind every day of my
service in Finland.
Second, there is the matter that Senator Kaine addressed
just now, the resolution of the crisis in Ukraine and the role
that can be played by Finland in a constructive sense, working
with the United States and with the European Union to
communicate to the Russians the absolute necessity of finding a
satisfactory resolution to this crisis quickly in order that
the sanctions regime can gradually be diminished rather than
strengthened still further.
Thirdly is the matter of the expansion of the bilateral
trade relationship between Finland and the United States where,
as I indicated, I believe that the United States can move up in
the rankings both as a customer of Finland and as a supplier of
goods and services to that country.
Senator Perdue. Thank you very much.
Gentlemen, thank you for your comments today and for your
forbearance and for being here today. Your testimony is in the
record, and I am very impressed.
Just so you know, we are going to keep the record open in
case Senator Gardner or any other members of the committee have
any last-minute questions. I do not know that there will be
any. But we ask that you respond to those if you get those in
the next few days.
Again, I really want to thank you for your willingness to
serve our country. I am very encouraged when I meet high-
quality people with backgrounds like yours willing to serve. So
thank you very much.
With the thanks of this committee, unless the ranking
member has anything else, we will stand adjourned. Thank you
very much.
[Whereupon, at 3:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Matthew T. McGuire, Nominated to be U.S. Executive
Director of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development,
to a Questions from Members of the Committee
director-designate mcguire's responses
to a question from senator corker
Question. The World Bank Board in the next few months will be
reviewing staff recommendations to improve the procurement practices of
the Bank. While a number of very positive steps are being proposed, it
is my understanding that, currently, the staff does not appear to be
planning to propose changes to the bid price preference margins that
are granted to domestic bidders on bank projects (15 percent preference
on goods and 7.5 percent on works). Such preferences raise questions
about compatibility with efficient procurement and fair bid
competition. In fact, the impact of this practice can affect issues
that go beyond Bank procurement. For example, the Bank's policy
sometimes serves as an imprimatur for many developing countries to
follow this practice in their own procurement, all of which is to the
detriment of U.S. based bidders.
If confirmed, will you press for a prompt and serious
review of this practice?
Answer. Yes.
__________
director-designate mcguire's responses
to questions from senator barrasso
Question. I appreciate that in your testimony, you committed to
``be a sound steward of our country's capital at the Bank.'' It is
critically important that U.S. resources are used in a responsible and
effective manner.
Do you believe requiring borrowers to accept higher cost
energy projects is a responsible use of taxpayer dollars when
affordable and reliable alternatives are readily available?
Answer. The World Bank should support expansion of low-cost,
reliable energy access in developing countries, and should do so taking
into account full lifecycle costs, including environmental and social
costs. In some instances, this may lead to higher costs up front, but
should not lead to higher costs for the life of the project. The World
Bank has an important role to play in increasing the commercial
viability and promoting the expansion of renewable, clean, and
efficient energy sources and technologies.
Question. If confirmed, what criteria would you use to determine
whether you will vote in support of energy development projects at the
World Bank?
Answer. As I evaluate energy projects, I will look to see that the
project meets the country's energy needs, has considered all relevant
alternative approaches, and is as sustainable (both financially and
environmentally) as possible. Of course, there are a variety of issues
to consider in any project, including existing laws and policies, and
these will apply to energy projects as well.
Question. Will you vote in support of energy development projects
that include oil, coal, and natural gas at the World Bank?
Answer. I will vote in favor of projects that are consistent with
U.S. law and policies and the World Bank's own operating guidelines.
Consistent with its own Energy Sector Directions Paper, the World Bank
should work to increase the commercial viability and promote the
expansion of renewable, clean, and efficient energy sources and
technologies. Global energy needs are vast, and there are instances
where fossil fuels like gas and oil can play a role in the transition
to such sources. Both the administration's Climate Action Plan and the
World Bank's Energy Sector Directions Paper recognize the important
bridging role that natural gas can have in moving toward more
sustainable sources of energy supply.
Question. What are the current energy policies, rules, and
restrictions at the World Bank that impact financing of energy
development projects dealing with fossil fuels?
Answer. In July 2013, the World Bank adopted a new approach to its
engagement in the energy sector. The approach recognizes the importance
of increasing access to modern energy services through an integrated
approach that addresses both energy supply and demand issues, including
energy efficiency, tariff pricing, and reducing technical losses. The
approach notes that the World Bank Group will ``only in rare
circumstances'' support new greenfield coal power generation projects,
such as meeting basic energy needs in countries with no feasible
alternatives. The paper also says that the World Bank will scale up its
work helping countries develop national and regional markets for
natural gas.
Question. The World Bank approved a total of $1.6 billion in new
projects in China through its nonconcessional window in fiscal year
2014. In fiscal year 2014, China was the third-largest recipient of
financial assistance from International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development, after Brazil and India. In 2014, China participated in the
creation of two separate development banks called the Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank and the New Development Bank.
Why is the World Bank continuing to lend substantial
resources to China, when China can more than meet their
financing needs in the international capital market and started
creating their own international lending institutions?
Answer. China's per capita income ($6,550) remains below the
threshold ($7,185) at which point World Bank management is supposed to
initiate discussions about graduation.
If confirmed, I will encourage the World Bank to begin discussions
to transition China away from World Bank lending as it crosses the
graduation threshold and to move toward other vehicles, such as
reimbursable technical assistance and analytical and advisory
assistance, to meet its development needs.
Question. What is your view of the Asian Infrastructure Investment
Bank and the New Development Bank? What kind of duplication will these
new development banks have with existing multilateral and regional
institutions?
Answer. I believe that there is a pressing need to enhance
infrastructure investment around the world and that any new
institutions should be designed to complement the existing
institutions. I also believe that any new multilateral institution
should incorporate the high standards that the international community
has collectively built at the World Bank and the regional development
banks.
Question. Do you believe that lending substantial resources to
dynamic emerging market economies with access to international capital
markets diverts capital away from countries with greater needs and lack
of financial options?
Answer. No. The World Bank's sovereign lending is split between two
different windows specifically to address this issue. Countries with
greater needs and a lack of financial options receive concessional
financing (grants or highly concessional loans) through the World
Bank's concessional window--the International Development Association
(IDA). As a country's per capita income increases and it gains access
to international credit markets, it graduates from IDA to the World
Bank's nonconcessional window--the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development (IBRD).
The allocation of the IBRD's financial resources depends on a
variety of factors, including the size of the borrower's population,
economy, and its credit ratings. This method of allocating resources
helps the IBRD to maintain its AAA credit rating and limits the need
for frequent infusions of capital by its shareholders. Given differing
credit profiles, reducing lending to upper middle-income countries will
not result in a dollar-for-dollar increase in capital available for
IBRD lending to lower middle-income countries. The IBRD must be able to
provide adequate resources to lower middle-income countries as they
graduate from IDA, but the IBRD has taken a number of steps to ensure
that it has adequate capital resources to do so over the medium-term.
Question. What specific policies do you propose for graduating
middle-income countries at the World Bank?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to urge World Bank management
to apply the World Bank's existing graduation policy in a more
consistent fashion. According to World Bank policy, countries remain
eligible to borrow from the IBRD until they are able to sustain long-
term development without further recourse to World Bank financing and
until they have reached a sufficiently advanced level of development.
The World Bank uses a per capita income threshold (currently $7,185) as
a trigger for discussions on graduation. I believe that the World Bank
should be having serious discussions with more borrowers about
graduation. As countries approach the threshold for graduation, I will
also encourage the World Bank to be more selective about which sectors
it supports in those countries, with a focus on those that have the
greatest impact on poverty reduction and have a global or regional
public good aspect associated with them.
Responses of Charles C. Adams, Jr., Nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Finland, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate adams's responses
to questions from senator shaheen
Question. If confirmed as the next Ambassador to the Republic of
Finland, will you commit to making the issue of gender equality and the
particular challenge in Finland of gender-based violence a priority for
this bilateral relationship?
Answer. If confirmed as the next Ambassador to the Republic of
Finland, I commit to continuing our efforts to enhance human rights,
including with regard to gender equality. With the use of important
tools such as the annual Human Rights Report, and with the assistance
of the State Department's Office of Global Women's Issues, I will
continue to partner with Finland on eliminating gender inequality
globally as well as engage with Finland on addressing gender-based
violence at home. I am encouraged by our ongoing partnership with
Finland, which has been the lead on U.N. Security Council Resolution
1325 implementation in Afghanistan. In this role, Finland has helped
promote the importance of women in peace and security. The Finnish
Government has also recognized the problem of gender-based violence
domestically and adopted a 5-year, multisectoral action plan to combat
violence against women. In addition, Finland recently passed
legislation, effective January 1, 2015, outlining the government's
assistance to and responsibility for safe houses and shelters for
victims of domestic violence. If confirmed, my team and I will continue
to support efforts to address the problem of gender-based violence.
__________
NOMINATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Paul A. Folmsbee, of Oklahoma, to be Ambassador of the United
States of America to the Republic of Mali
Mary Catherine Phee, of Illinois, to be Ambassador of the
United States of America to the Republic of South Sudan
Cassandra Q. Butts, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador of the United States of America to the
Commonwealth of the Bahamas
Katherine Simonds Dhanani, of Florida, to be Ambassador of the
United States of America to the Federal Republic of
Somalia
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:16 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Flake
presiding.
Present: Senators Flake and Markey.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA
Senator Flake. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will
come to order. I would like to welcome all of you here, both
the nominees and family members.
We have talked and been able to meet all of you in my
office. Thank you for coming by.
As you know, I have long had an interest in Africa, having
spent some time there. Last week, Ed and I presided over a
hearing, a subcommittee hearing examining the economic policies
or the promises that exist on the continent, particularly after
the summit we had, the Leader summit last August. That was our
first hearing in the Congress, and we will have many more.
But today, we are going to hear from nominees to Mali,
South Sudan, and Somalia, and we will look at some of sub-
Saharan Africa's most serious challenges. We also have the
nominee for the Bahamas as well. I am grateful that she is
here.
After seeing positive developments in 2013, Mali's security
and governance climate has continued to deteriorate. And
despite international pressure and ongoing mediation efforts,
the conflict of South Sudan has continued for over a year,
costing more than 10,000 lives, displacing more than 2 million
people, causing millions more to require humanitarian
assistance.
The administration's decision to nominate an Ambassador in
Somalia offers at least a glimmer of hope for movement on the
security and governance front. I look forward to hearing more
about the potential for progress, as well as the hurdles that
exist, when we establish a presence in Mogadishu.
We are also considering a nominee, as I mentioned, for the
Bahamas. It is an important regional neighbor, and I look
forward to thoughts on economic progress and partnership with
us here.
Thank you all for your time and for your expertise. I look
forward to your testimony.
With that, I recognize Senator Markey.
STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, so much, and I
very much appreciate you holding this very important hearing.
Three of the nominees that we are going to be talking
about, and to, today, and hoping to be confirmed as U.S.
Ambassadors, are looking at three of the most challenging
countries in sub-Saharan Government: Mali, South Sudan, and
Somalia. The fourth is seeking confirmation to the Bahamas, a
place that most likely conjures up thoughts of vacation, but in
truth it is a critical country on the United States third
border in the Caribbean.
All four of our nominees have distinguished records of
public service that will continue as U.S. Ambassadors when they
are confirmed.
And I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for having this hearing.
Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Markey. Our first nominee
is Paul Folmsbee. Mr. Folmsbee is a career member of the Senior
Foreign Service. He currently serves as executive director of
the State Department's Bureau of African Affairs. Previously,
Mr. Folmsbee served in a number of challenging assignments,
including senior civilian representative for the Regional
Command East Afghanistan; principal officer at the U.S.
consulate in Mumbai, India; the Provincial Reconstruction team
leader in Baghdad; and the director of international narcotics
in law enforcement affairs at our Embassy in Pakistan.
Mr. Folsmbee has also served in a number of Africa
assignments, including Gabon, Tanzania, Kenya. Mr. Folmsbee
earned a B.A. in political science from Tabor College in
Hillsboro, Kansas, and an M.A. in social anthropology from the
University of Oklahoma in Norman, OK.
Our second nominee is Mary Catherine Phee. Ms. Phee is a
career member of the Senior Foreign Service, currently serves
as chief of staff in the Office of the Special Envoy for Sudan
and South Sudan. From 2011 to 2014, Ms. Phee served as deputy
chief of staff in Ethiopia. She was previously director for
Iraq at the National Security Council, the regional affairs
coordinator at the U.S. Embassy in Rome, and counselor for
political affairs at the U.S. mission at the U.N. in New York.
Ms. Phee has held multiple positions focusing on Iraq and
other countries in the Middle East. And before joining the
Foreign Service, Ms. Phee also worked at Development
Alternatives, a Bethesda, MD, company, and as deputy press
secretary for Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan. Ms. Phee earned
a B.A. at Indiana University and a master's degree from the
Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.
Our third nominee is Cassandra Butts. Ms. Butts is
currently a senior adviser to the CEO at the Millennium
Challenge Corporation. Previously, she served at the White
House as deputy counsel to the President, general counsel in
the Office of the President Elect, and general counsel for the
Obama transition project. Prior to these nominations, Ms. Butts
was the senior vice president for domestic policy at the Center
for American Progress, and counsel and policy director for
Representative Richard Gephardt in the United States House of
Representatives.
She earned a B.A. from the University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill, NC, and a J.D. from Harvard Law School.
Our fourth nominee is Katherine Simonds Dhanani. Ms.
Dhanani is a career Foreign Service officer and currently
serves as director of the Office of Regional and Security
Affairs in the State Department's Bureau of African Affairs.
Previously, Ms. Dhanani served as consul general at the U.S.
consulate in India. She has held numerous assignments in
Africa, including deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy
in Harare, Zimbabwe, and at the U.S. Embassy in Gabon. Prior to
Gabon, she was political and economic section chief at the U.S.
Embassy in Zambia, and economic section chief in the DRC.
Ms. Dhanani earned a B.A. from Kenyon College in Gambier,
OH, and an M.A. from MIT.
So thank you all for being here. Thank you for sharing your
thoughts and viewpoints. I am sure you will want to introduce
family members as well, and we appreciate them for the
sacrifice that they make as well as you serve.
We would appreciate it if you could keep your testimony to
about 5 minutes, and then we can have time for questions to be
asked.
So we will recognize Mr. Folmsbee first, and thank you
again for being here.
STATEMENT OF PAUL A. FOLMSBEE, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF MALI
Mr. Folmsbee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Markey, and distinguished members of the committee. I am
honored to come before you as President Obama's nominee to be
the next United States Ambassador to Mali. I deeply appreciate
the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of State
have shown in nominating me for this position.
I am supported here today by my friends and colleagues from
the State Department's Bureau of African Affairs, as well as my
friends from USAID. In fact, my former PRT deputy leader from
Baghdad is actually sitting behind me, Jeff Bakken. He is a
good man.
My wife, Angie Chin, is also a U.S. diplomat and is
probably watching us from Bangkok, Thailand, right about now.
Unfortunately, she could not be here today.
My career in the Foreign Service began in 1987 and has led
to me to assignments all over the world. The bulk of my
assignments have been in developing countries, including Kenya,
Haiti, Gabon, and Tanzania. In Iraq in 2007, I embedded with
the 2/82nd Airborne, and ran a Provincial Reconstruction Team
in Sadr City and Adhamiyah in downtown Baghdad. In Afghanistan
in 2011, I embedded with the 1st Cavalry as a senior civilian
rep for Regional Command East, where we worked on expanding
governance and economic development programs.
If confirmed, I would draw upon these experiences and many
others to deepen U.S.-Mali ties, as we continue to work toward
our mutual goals of combating extremism, strengthening
democratic governance, and fostering inclusive economic growth.
Mali continues to emerge from the most serious security,
political, and development crisis it has faced since
independence. It is rebuilding its social, economic, and
governance institutions following the March 2012 coup d'etat
and subsequent takeover of parts of northern Mali by
extremists.
Poverty both exacerbates Mali's conflicts and underscores
its capacity challenges. Mali is ranked 176th of the 187
nations in the United Nations 2014 Human Development Index. In
addition, the recent coup and the events that followed revealed
the fragility of Mali's government institutions.
Despite these challenges, Mali peacefully elected a
President and National Assembly in 2013. The new government has
made national reconciliation a top priority, and donors are now
engaging with the country. It is within this context U.S.
engagement will be critical as we foster democratic values,
promote good governance, and engender peace and security.
U.S. assistance programs will continue to increase access
to education and health services, improve nutrition and
sanitation, strengthen Malian food security, and facilitate
inclusive economic growth. One of the key strategies for
deepening economic growth is expanding the resiliency of poor
communities so they will not be vulnerable to the shocks of
extreme weather and conflict.
Security and stability remain a major challenge. The United
Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission,
which is quite a mouthful, we call it MINUSMA, was established
by the Security Council Resolution 2100 in April of 2013 to
support the stabilization of the country and to carry out a
number of security-related tasks.
Our government continues to fully support that effort by
providing training, equipment, and intelligence. The success of
this mission is critical to the long-term stability of the
country.
Another key objective is to aid in the reformation of the
Malian security sector by supporting institutions that can
manage internal and external security threats, contribute to
national and regional stability while adhering to civilian
authority and respect international law and human rights norms.
While there are a number of areas in the security sector
that require investment, the near-to-medium-term priority for
U.S. assistance are those activities that will refine the
national strategy, repair civilian-military relations, improve
access to justice in the north, and encourage the legislature
and civil society stakeholders to hold security services
accountable.
The government has engaged in internationally supported
efforts to advance peace talks with the northern armed groups.
These talks are ongoing, and their positive outcome is far from
ensured.
The U.S. Government will continue to participate in these
negotiations as an observer and will also continue to look for
opportunities to support a balanced and peaceful way forward.
The outbreak of the Ebola virus in West Africa, and the
threat it represented to Mali, punctuated the need for urgent
cooperation on health matters. Early containment of the
outbreak was a major priority for the Government of Mali,
international partners, and the United States. Fortunately, the
threat was successfully contained, aided in part by direct U.S.
assistance from the State Department, the National Institutes
of Health, CDC, and USAID.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if confirmed, I
will look to you for counsel and support to ensure that our
bilateral relationship remains firmly rooted in our shared
vision of a democratic and prosperous Mali.
Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I
would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Folmsbee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Paul A. Folmsbee
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey, and distinguished members of
the committee, I am honored to come before you as President Obama's
nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to Mali. I deeply
appreciate the confidence and trust the President and Secretary of
State have shown in nominating me for this position.
I am supported here today by my friends and colleagues from the
State Department's Bureau of African Affairs and USAID. My wife
Angelika Chin is also a U.S. diplomat and is serving at our Embassy in
Bangkok, Thailand. Unfortunately she could not be here today.
My career in the Foreign Service began in 1987 and has led me to
assignments all over the world. The bulk of my assignments have been to
developing countries including Kenya, Haiti, Gabon, and Tanzania. In
Iraq, in 2007, I embedded with the 2/82 Airborne and ran a Provincial
Reconstruction Team in Sadr City and Adhamiya in downtown Baghdad. In
Afghanistan in 2011, I embedded with the 1st Cavalry as the Senior
Civilian Representative for Regional Command East and worked on
expanding governance and economic development programs. If confirmed, I
would draw upon these experiences and many others to deepen U.S.-Mali
ties as we continue to work toward our mutual goals of combating
extremism, strengthening democratic governance and fostering inclusive
economic growth.
Mali continues to emerge from the most serious security, political,
and development crises it has faced since independence. It is
rebuilding its social, economic, and governance institutions following
a rebellion in the north, the March 2012 coup d'etat, and the
subsequent takeover of parts of northern Mali by extremists. Poverty
both exacerbates Mali's conflicts and underscores its capacity
challenges. Mali is ranked 176th of the 187 nations in the United
Nation's 2014 Human Development Index. In addition, conflict with
northern groups, the recent coup and the events that followed revealed
the fragility of Mali's government institutions. Despite those
challenges, Mali peacefully elected a President and National Assembly
in 2013. The new government has made national reconciliation a top
priority and donors are engaging with the country. It is within this
context that U.S. engagement will be critical as we foster democratic
values, promote good governance and engender peace and security. U.S.
assistance programs will continue to increase access to education and
health services, improve nutrition and sanitation, strengthen Malians'
food security, and facilitate inclusive economic growth. One of the key
strategies for deepening economic growth is expanding the resiliency of
poor communities so that they will not be vulnerable to the shocks of
extreme weather and conflict.
Security and stability remain a major challenge. The United Nations
Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA) was
established by Security Council Resolution 2100 in April of 2013 to
support the stabilization of the country and to carry out a number of
security-related tasks. Our government continues to fully support that
effort by providing training, equipment and intelligence. The success
of this mission is critical to the long-term stability of the country.
Another key objective is to aid in the reformation of the Malian
security sector by supporting institutions that can manage internal and
external security threats, contribute to national and regional
stability while adhering to civilian authority, and respect
international law and human rights norms. While there are a number of
areas in the security sector that require investment, the near- to
medium-term priority for U.S. assistance are those activities that will
refine the national security strategy, repair civilian-military
relations, improve access to justice in the north, and encourage the
legislature and civil society stakeholders to hold security services
accountable.
The government has engaged in internationally supported efforts to
advance peace talks with the northern armed groups. These talks are
ongoing and their positive outcome is far from assured. The U.S.
Government will continue to participate in these negotiations as an
observer and will also continue to look for opportunities to support a
balanced and peaceful way forward.
The outbreak of the Ebola virus in West Africa and the threat it
represented to Mali punctuated the need for urgent cooperation on
health matters. Early containment of the outbreak was a major priority
for both the Government of Mali, international partners, and the United
States. Fortunately, the threat was successfully contained, aided in
part by direct U.S. assistance from the State Department, the National
Institutes of Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and
U.S. Agency for International Development.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, if confirmed, I will
look to you for counsel and support to ensure that our bilateral
relationship remains firmly rooted in our shared vision of a democratic
and prosperous Mali. Thank you for inviting me to appear before you
today. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Ms. Phee.
STATEMENT OF MARY CATHERINE PHEE, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH SUDAN
Ms. Phee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey,
distinguished members of the committee. I am honored to appear
before you today as the President's nominee to be the United
States Ambassador to the Republic of South Sudan.
I would like to thank President Obama and Secretary Kerry
for the confidence they have placed in me. If confirmed, I will
look forward to working with this committee.
I would also like to thank my family, friends, and
colleagues who have generously shared encouragement, support,
and laughter throughout my career. I could not undertake these
challenges without them. And I would like to draw special
attention to my sister, Amy, who is here today.
I am deeply proud of the opportunity to serve our Nation
and to apply my experience in tough situations to advance
American interests and values.
Mr. Chairman, I know you and the members of the committee
share in the profound disappointment many of us experienced in
December 2013 when the political process in South Sudan broke
down, and the country's leaders resorted to violence to resolve
their disputes. And as you noted, this has resulted in a
significant loss of life and nearly 2 million people have been
displaced inside and outside of South Sudan. More than 4
million people now need emergency humanitarian assistance, and
the country's fledgling economy is at a standstill.
Our disappointment is rooted in the special relationship
that we in the United States, including Congress, successive
administrations, and the American people, forged with the
people of South Sudan during their long civil wars and struggle
for self-determination. We had high hopes that the 2005
Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which led to independence in
2011, offered a permanent end to war. But we were not blind to
the challenges of overcoming decades of inadequate government,
security, and development, and, with our international
partners, sought to avert a breakdown of the fragile political
order.
Then and now, our core interests remain strengthening this
young democratic state and promoting internal stability and
regional peace.
In collaboration with our Troika partners, which are the
United Kingdom and Norway, we are backing negotiations to
convince President Salva Kiir and former Vice President Riek
Machar to commit to a durable cease-fire and to agree to a
transitional government of national unity. The negotiating
effort has been led by the group of countries neighboring South
Sudan known as the Intergovernmental Authority on Development,
or, more easily, IGAD. To the frustration of all, to date, the
parties have resisted compromise.
The current IGAD chairman, Ethiopian Prime Minister
Hailemariam Desalegn, announced March 6 that he would reform
the peace process to formally include the African Union, the
Troika, the United Nations, the EU, and China. We support this
approach.
To be sustainable, we believe the final peace agreement
must respect the desire of the people of South Sudan for
justice and accountability, as well as reconciliation and
healing.
We have called for the prompt release of the official
report from the African Union's Commission of Inquiry, which
was charged with investigating human rights violations and
other abuses during the armed conflict. To advance the peace
process, the U.N. Security Council on March 3 unanimously
adopted a resolution we introduced that established a targeted
sanctions regime and proposed an arms embargo that could be
imposed should the South Sudanese leaders fail to respond to
the mediation.
To address the humanitarian impact, we have provided more
than $994 million in emergency humanitarian assistance,
including help for internally displaced persons and refugees in
neighboring countries. This assistance has helped stave off
famine and provided lifesaving services such as water,
sanitation, and health care.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with the leaders
and the people of South Sudan to help end the conflict and
begin the rebuilding. I will provide vigorous support to the
ongoing effort to improve the humanitarian situation.
Through our partnership, we can help South Sudan begin to
recover from this devastating setback, and regain the
opportunities present at independence.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I assure you that, if confirmed, I
will be proud to carry on the diplomatic tradition of ensuring
the safety and security of American citizens abroad while
focusing on the welfare of the American and South Sudanese
staff of Embassy Juba.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey, I thank you for the
honor to appear before you today, and I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Phee follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mary Catherine Phee
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey, members of the committee, I am
honored to appear before you as the President's nominee to be the
United States Ambassador to the Republic of South Sudan. I would like
to thank President Obama and Secretary Kerry for the confidence they
have placed in me. If confirmed, I will look forward to working with
this committee. I would also like to thank my family, friends, and
colleagues who have generously shared encouragement, support, and
laughter throughout my career. I could not undertake these challenges
without them. I am deeply proud of the opportunity to serve our Nation
and to apply my experience in tough situations to advance American
interests.
Mr. Chairman, I know you and the members of the committee share in
the profound disappointment many of us experienced in December 2013
when the political process in South Sudan broke down and the country's
leaders resorted to violence to resolve their disputes. This breakdown
has generated a senseless conflict. There has been a significant loss
of life and nearly 2 million people have been displaced inside and
outside of South Sudan. More than 4 million people now need emergency
humanitarian assistance and the country's fledgling economy is at a
standstill.
Our disappointment is rooted in the special relationship that we in
the United States--including Congress, successive administrations, and
the American people--forged with the people of South Sudan during their
long civil wars and struggle for self-determination. We had high hopes
that the 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement, which led to independence
in 2011, offered a permanent end to war in South Sudan. But we were not
blind to the challenges of overcoming decades of inadequate governance,
development, and security, and, with our international partners, sought
to avert a breakdown of the fragile political order. Then and now, our
core interests remain strengthening this young democratic state and
promoting internal stability and regional peace.
In collaboration with our Troika partners, which are the United
Kingdom and Norway, we are backing negotiations to convince President
Salva Kiir and former Vice President Riek Machar to commit to a durable
cease-fire and to agree to a transitional government of national unity.
The negotiating effort has been led by the group of countries
neighboring South Sudan known as the Intergovernmental Authority on
Development, or IGAD. To the frustration of all, to date the parties
have resisted compromise. The current IGAD Chairman, Ethiopian Prime
Minister Hailemariam Desalegn, announced March 6 that he would reform
the peace process to include the African Union, the Troika, the U.N.,
the EU, and China. We support this approach.
To be sustainable, we believe the final peace agreement must
respect the desire of the people of South Sudan for justice and
accountability, as well as reconciliation and healing. We have called
for the prompt release of the official report from the African Union's
Commission of Inquiry, which was charged with investigating human
rights violations and other abuses during the armed conflict.
To advance the peace process, the U.N. Security Council on March 3
unanimously adopted a resolution we introduced that established a
targeted sanctions regime and proposed an arms embargo that could be
imposed should the South Sudanese leaders fail to respond to the
mediation. The resolution demonstrates that the international community
condemns this conflict and seeks a prompt, negotiated end to the
crisis.
To address the humanitarian impact on the people of South Sudan, we
have provided more than $994 million in emergency humanitarian
assistance since the conflict began, including help for internally
displaced persons and refugees in neighboring countries. This
assistance has helped stave off famine and provided lifesaving
services, such as water, sanitation, and health care.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with the leaders and the
people of South Sudan to help end the conflict and begin the
rebuilding. I will provide vigorous support to the ongoing effort to
improve the humanitarian situation. Through our partnership we can help
South Sudan begin to recover from this devastating setback and regain
the opportunities present at independence.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, I assure you that, if confirmed, I will be
proud to carry on the diplomatic tradition of ensuring the safety and
security of American citizens abroad, while focusing on the welfare of
the American and South Sudanese staff members of Embassy Juba.
Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Markey, I thank you for the honor
to appear before you today and I welcome your questions.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Ms. Butts.
STATEMENT OF CASSANDRA Q. BUTTS, NOMINATED TO BE AMBASSADOR TO
THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE BAHAMAS
Ms. Butts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member. I
appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to be our next Ambassador to the
Commonwealth of the Bahamas.
I am profoundly grateful for the honor the President has
bestowed upon me, and for the confidence shown in me by
Secretary Kerry, as I look to assume this new assignment, if
confirmed.
I would like to take the opportunity to introduce my
sister, Deidra Abbott, who is here today, representing my
family. My family has been a wellspring of support for me, and
I would not be here today but for their support, their love,
and their belief in me.
I believe my experience as a lawyer and a policy adviser,
and my service to my country in the executive and legislative
branches, have well-prepared me for the duties of Ambassador to
the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. Having worked on some of the
major legal policy issues of our time, including my most recent
experience in international development at the Millennium
Challenge Corporation, I have always sought solutions
consistent with the values of our great Nation. I understand
that leading with our values is a basis for finding lasting
policy solutions and building strong partnerships at home and
abroad.
If the Senate confirms me, I would bring those experiences
grounded in my strong belief in equality, justice, and
compassion to the post of the Ambassador to the Commonwealth of
the Bahamas.
Through close political and economic and cultural ties, the
United States and the Bahamas have forged a strong bilateral
relationship that has served both countries quite well.
Bahamians regularly travel to the United States to visit
friends and family and to conduct business, and approximately 6
million U.S. citizens travel to the Bahamas annually.
The proximity of the Bahamas to the United Sates
inextricably links our country's national security. Together,
we are confronting shared challenges, such as illicit
trafficking, including narcotics, arms, and people, as well as
bolstering the rule of law.
If confirmed, my first and foremost priority will be to
ensure the safety and security of U.S. citizens living in or
visiting the Bahamas, as well as the Turks and Caicos Islands,
which are included among Embassy Nassau's consular oversight.
I will work closely with the Bahamian authorities,
community groups, and the entire U.S. mission, including the
U.S. law enforcement officials, under Chief of Mission
Authority, to promote innovative, effective, and whole-of-
government-based efforts to reduce crime rates and other
illegal activities. I will also continue to promote greater
economic ties and growth, including exploring ways to make the
Bahamas a more attractive place in which to invest and do
business through the development and enforcement of stable and
transparent regulations, as well as procurement and investment
procedures.
If confirmed, I will work to assist the Bahamas in
protecting and preserving for future generations the incredible
natural beauty that makes it the vacation destination of choice
for so many people, including by expanding marine protected
areas. As part of the same effort, I will encourage the Bahamas
to adopt cleaner technologies and build strong and resilient
energy markets, which will not only provide a more secure and
sustainable clean energy future in economic growth, but also
limit the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.
I also will make working with our Bahamian partners on
human rights issues a priority by seeking to further gender
equality; to expand opportunities for disenfranchised youth;
and to encourage Bahamian officials to adopt fair, humane, and
transparent practices related to irregular migrants, including
improved access to refugee status determinations.
Expanding educational exchanges is one of the best ways to
deepen the already existing cultural and historic ties between
the United States and the Bahamas. At present, approximately
1,700 students from the Bahamas study in the United States, and
more than 750 students from the United States study in the
Bahamas. If confirmed, I will seek to increase levels of
educational exchange between our two countries, including
through enhancing existing partnerships and building new ones.
While geography and history have forged strong bonds
between our countries, the Bahamas also maintains close
economic ties with many other nations. As the world economy
continues to rebound, the Bahamas key tourism and hospitality
sectors have seen increases in Asian investment. We do not see
foreign economic and commercial links to the Bahamas as a
threat to U.S. interests. We strongly believe that the American
companies can successfully compete with anybody in the world
when transparent regulations and practices with steadfast
respect for the rule of law prevail.
The United States has not had an ambassador in Nassau for
over 4 years, but we have strong leadership and staff at U.S.
Embassy the Bahamas continuing the important work of the
mission. Still, the value of having a confirmed U.S. Ambassador
to advance U.S. interests cannot be overstated.
If confirmed, I will strive to further the good work of our
Nassau mission and strengthen the close and productive
bilateral relationship.
In closing, I am confident that I have the experience and
imagination and the energy to lead our bilateral relationship
with the people and the Government of the Commonwealth of the
Bahamas. I thank you, again, Mr. Chairman, and Mr. Ranking
Member Markey, and I look forward to answering any questions
you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Butts follows:]
Prepared Statement of Cassandra Q. Butts
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to be the next Ambassador to the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. I
am profoundly grateful for the honor the President has bestowed upon me
and for the confidence shown in me by Secretary Kerry as I look to take
up this assignment, if confirmed.
Please allow me to introduce the members of my family who are here
today. My family has been a wellspring of support. I am here today
because of their love and support and because of their dedication and
belief in me.
I believe my experience as a lawyer and policy advisor and my
service to my country in the executive and legislative branches have
well prepared me for the duties of Ambassador to the Commonwealth of
the Bahamas. Having worked on some of the major legal and policy issues
of our time, including my most recent experience in international
development at the Millennium Challenge Corporation, I have always
sought solutions consistent with the values of our great Nation. I
understand that leading with our values is the basis for finding
lasting policy solutions and building strong partnerships at home and
abroad. If the Senate confirms me, I would bring those experiences,
grounded in my strong belief in equality, justice, and compassion, to
the post of Ambassador to the Commonwealth of the Bahamas.
Through close political, economic, and cultural ties, the United
States and the Bahamas have forged a strong bilateral relationship that
has served both countries well. Bahamians regularly travel to the
United States to visit friends and family and to conduct business. And
approximately 6 million U.S. citizens travel to the Bahamas annually.
The proximity of the Bahamas to the United States inextricably links
our countries' national security. Together we are confronting shared
challenges such as illicit trafficking, including in narcotics, arms,
and people, as well as bolstering the rule of law.
If confirmed, my first and foremost priority will be to ensure the
safety and security of U.S. citizens living in or visiting the Bahamas,
as well as the Turks and Caicos Islands, which are included under
Embassy Nassau's consular oversight. I will work closely with Bahamian
authorities, community groups, and the entire U.S. mission, including
U.S. law enforcement officials under Chief of Mission authority, to
promote innovative, effective, and whole-of-government based efforts to
reduce crime rates and other illegal activities. I also will continue
to promote greater economic ties and growth, including exploring ways
to make the Bahamas a more attractive place in which to invest and do
business through the development and enforcement of stable and
transparent regulations as well as procurement and investment
procedures.
If confirmed, I will work to assist the Bahamas in protecting and
preserving for future generations the incredible natural beauty that
makes it the vacation destination of choice for so many people,
including by expanding marine protected areas. As part of this same
effort, I will encourage the Bahamas to adopt cleaner technologies and
build strong and resilient energy markets, which will not only provide
a more secure and sustainable clean energy future and economic growth,
but also limit the effects of greenhouse gas emissions.
I also will make working with our Bahamian partners on human rights
issues a priority by seeking to further gender equality; to expand
opportunities for disenfranchised youth; and to encourage Bahamian
officials to adopt fair, humane, and transparent practices related to
irregular migrants, including improved access to refugee status
determinations.
Expanding educational exchanges is one of the best ways to deepen
the already existing cultural and historical ties between the United
States and the Bahamas. At present, approximately 1,700 students from
the Bahamas study in the United States, and more than 750 students from
the United States study in the Bahamas. If confirmed, I will seek to
increase levels of educational exchange between our two countries,
including through enhancing existing partnerships and the building of
new ones.
While geography and history have forged strong bonds between our
countries, the Bahamas also maintains close economic ties with many
other nations. As the world economy continues to rebound, the Bahamas'
key tourism and hospitality sectors have seen increases in Asian
investment. We do not see foreign economic and commercial links to the
Bahamas as a threat to U.S. interests. We strongly believe that
American companies can successfully compete with anybody in the world
when transparent regulations and practices and steadfast respect for
the rule of law prevail.
The United States has not had an ambassador in Nassau for over 4
years, but we have had strong leadership and staff at the U.S. Embassy
in the Bahamas continuing the important work of the mission. Still, the
value of having a confirmed U.S. ambassador to advance U.S. interests
cannot be overstated. If confirmed, I will strive to further the good
work of our Nassau mission and strengthen a close and productive
bilateral relationship.
In closing, I am confident that I have the experience, imagination,
and energy to lead our bilateral relationship with the people and the
Government of the Commonwealth of the Bahamas. While at the Millennium
Challenge Corporation, I have seen firsthand the important work carried
out by our ambassadors and their teams as they engage and advocate for
U.S. policy goals and objectives. If confirmed, I pledge to uphold the
tradition and high standards of public service expected of a U.S.
ambassador. I look forward to the opportunity to continue to serve my
country.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I welcome your
questions.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Ms. Dhanani.
STATEMENT OF KATHERINE SIMONDS DHANANI, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF SOMALIA
Ms. Dhanani. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey, I am
honored to appear before you today to be considered for the
position of United States Ambassador to the Federal Republic of
Somalia.
I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry
for the confidence in me they have shown with this nomination.
If confirmed, I pledge to work with you to advance our
interests by promoting a unified and peaceful Somalia with a
stable and representative government that can defend its
territory, foster economic development, and defend human
rights.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me at this time to introduce my
husband, Azim Dhanani. His support has meant everything to me
as he accompanied me to assignments around the globe. And if
confirmed, I will continue to rely on him as I take up my new
responsibilities.
This is a critical time in our engagement with Somalia.
Decades of conflict, famine, and oppression led many to label
Somalia a failed state. Today, Somalis are proving those
pessimists wrong. There is progress in Somalia, measured, but
real progress on security, on economic development, and on the
establishment of representative government.
Just over 2 years ago, the United States officially
recognized the Federal Government of Somalia. Since that time,
we have been working closely with the Somalis as they rebuild
their state and lay a foundation for the future.
The decision to nominate the first U.S. Ambassador to
Somalia in over 2 decades was taken in recognition of our
deepening relationship and our conviction that Somalia is on a
path that will bring better times. Establishment of a permanent
diplomatic presence in Mogadishu will represent the culmination
of this recognition process, but there is no fixed timeline for
achieving this objective.
If confirmed, I will carefully monitor the security
environment in Somalia, as I seek to advance our diplomatic
objectives with no higher priority than my responsibility for
the security of personnel under my charge. U.S. interests in
Somalia are clear, just as the collapse of Somalia was a strain
on the region, stability, prosperity, and peace in Somalia will
bolster positive trends in economic and democratic development
in Africa.
Violent extremists exploited the past failure of governance
in Somalia to our and Somali's detriment.
We have a strong humanitarian interest in easing the
suffering of 2 million refugees and internally displaced
persons, in reducing the food insecurity that leaves Somalia
vulnerable to famine, and in addressing the failures that place
Somalia at the bottom of the list on so many human development
indicators.
If confirmed, I will keep these U.S. interests firmly in
mind as I lead U.S. engagement with the Somali Government, the
Somali people, and the international partners who share our
commitment to seeing Somalia succeed.
Mr. Chairman, in my written statement, I outlined the U.S.
strategy on Somalia, which was submitted to Congress last
summer. In the interests of time, I will not repeat that, but
in sum, U.S. policy revolves around three elements: security,
the political process, and development. Gains in each reinforce
and must keep pace with the others.
Mr. Chairman, Somalia is moving in the right direction but
more progress is needed. Somali leaders must pull together to
build their institutions, protect their citizens, and unite
their country. Somalia's neighbors and friends must assist in
that effort.
I can assure you today that, if confirmed, it will be my
honor to restore U.S. Mission Somalia, advance U.S. interests,
and strengthen our relationship with Somalia. And I look
forward to the opportunity to work with the committee to
achieve those goals.
I also look forward to answering any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Dhanani follows:]
Prepared Statement of Katherine S. Dhanani
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee,
I am honored to appear before you today to be considered for the
position of United States Ambassador to the Federal Republic of
Somalia. I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry
for the confidence in me they have shown through this nomination. If
confirmed, I pledge to work with you to advance our interests by
promoting a unified and peaceful Somalia, with a stable and
representative government, that can defend its territory, foster
economic development, and defend human rights.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me at this time to introduce my husband,
Azim Dhanani. His support has meant everything to me as he accompanied
me to assignments around the globe, and, if confirmed, I will continue
to rely on him as I take up my new responsibilities.
This is a critical time in our engagement with Somalia. Decades of
conflict, famine, and oppression led many to label Somalia a ``failed
state.'' Today, Somalis are proving those pessimists wrong. There is
progress in Somalia--measured but real progress--on security, on
economic development, and on the establishment of representative
government. Just over 2 years ago, the United States officially
recognized the Federal Government of Somalia. Since that time, we have
been working closely with the Somalis as they rebuild their state and
lay a foundation for the future. The decision to nominate the first
U.S. Ambassador to Somalia in over two decades was taken in recognition
of our deepening relationship and our conviction that Somalia is on a
path that will bring better times. Establishment of a permanent
diplomatic presence in Mogadishu will represent the culmination of this
recognition process, but there is no fixed timeline for achieving this
objective. If confirmed, I will carefully monitor the security
environment in Somalia as I seek to advance our diplomatic objectives,
with no higher priority than my responsibility for the security of
personnel under my charge.
U.S. interests in Somalia are clear. Just as the collapse of
Somalia was a strain on the region, stability, prosperity, and peace in
Somalia will bolster positive trends in economic and democratic
development in Africa. Violent extremists exploited the past failure of
governance in Somalia, to our and Somalis' detriment. We have a strong
humanitarian interest in easing the suffering of 2 million refugees and
internally displaced Somalis, in reducing the food insecurity that
leaves Somalia vulnerable to famine, and in addressing the failures
that place Somalia at the bottom of the list on so many human
development indicators. If confirmed, I will keep these U.S. interests
firmly in mind as I lead U.S. engagement with the Somali Government,
the Somali people, and the international partners who share our
commitment to seeing Somalia succeed.
Mr. Chairman, as referenced in the U.S. Strategy on Somalia that
the State Department submitted to Congress last summer, and the
subsequent January update, U.S. policy revolves around three elements:
security, the political process, and development. On the security
front, our top priority is degrading al-Shabaab, which has links to al-
Qaeda. Driving al-Shabaab from its remaining strongholds and
neutralizing it as a destabilizing force are critical to open up space
for legitimate governance and development opportunities. If confirmed
as Chief of Mission, it will be my priority to continue our efforts to
help our African partners to degrade
al-Shabaab. I will continue to support the African Union Mission in
Somalia--or AMISOM as it is most commonly known--until Somalis are
ready and able to assume full responsibility for their own security. To
that end, building the capacity of the Somali National Security Forces
will be a top priority.
In Somalia, political and security gains must reinforce and keep
pace with one another. The Federal Government has made progress
establishing government institutions, negotiating relationships with
regional authorities, and supporting community stabilization. However,
the Somali Government's institutional capacity and reach remain
extremely limited. If confirmed, I will ensure that the United States,
in very close coordination with our international partners, continues
to support the Somali Government as it implements ``Vision 2016''--the
Somali-led state-building agenda for completing a federal state-
formation process, holding a constitutional referendum, and preparing
for democratic elections.
As we focus on the long-term goals of establishing a sustainable
federal system of governance, we must keep in focus the immediate needs
of the Somali people. Tragically, Somalis continue to face a multitude
of natural and man-made threats to their livelihoods and their lives.
Those imperiled by al-Shabaab risk losing their land, their livestock,
and their lives; those freed from al-Shabaab may still be in danger
from an overall lack of security, including gender-based violence and
interclan rivalry. Last year alone, conflict forced more than 80,000
Somalis from their homes. The food security situation continues to
teeter on the brink of crisis with a million or more Somalis at risk.
If I am confirmed, U.S. efforts to help address these urgent needs will
remain at the forefront of our engagement.
Mr. Chairman, Somalia is moving in the right direction, but more
progress is needed. Somali leaders must pull together to build their
institutions, protect their citizens, and unite their country.
Somalia's neighbors and friends must assist in that effort. I can
assure you today that, if confirmed, it will be my honor to restore
U.S. Mission Somalia, advance U.S. interests, and strengthen our
relationship with Somalia, and I look forward to the opportunity to
work with the committee to achieve those goals.
Senator Flake. Thank you, Ms. Dhanani. I want to apologize.
I put an ``L'' in your name at the beginning.
Well, thank you for your testimony, all of you, and thank
you again to the family members who are here and watching from
afar, as well.
Mr. Folmsbee, with regard to Mali, what is the biggest U.S.
commercial interest that we have there?
Mr. Folmsbee. You know, Senator, to be honest with you,
Mali is fighting for last place in a human index factor put out
by the United Nations. Its economy is at a low point after the
2012 coup, and so it is very modest.
Any kind of economic development issue, I am sure we could
dig up some U.S. sales and that sort of thing, but it is going
to be very limited. In reality, it is going to be development
assistance at this point.
Senator Flake. So commercial development not for a while,
mostly development?
Mr. Folmsbee. If we can hook some U.S. companies out there,
I promise you I will personally get on it and help get them out
there.
Senator Flake. It is a good place to start, in that regard.
Mr. Folmsbee. Absolutely.
Senator Flake. Well, great.
Ms. Phee, just yesterday it was reported that the
legislature or the lawmakers in South Sudan voted to extend the
President's term for another 3 years. I guess they are trying
to confer legitimacy where they can. What role is President
Kiir playing at present, in your view? What can he do to help
the situation at this point?
Ms. Phee. Thank you, Senator. We believe the best approach
remains a peace agreement, a peace agreement that would end the
conflict and establish a transitional government of national
unity. And one of the key tasks of that transitional government
would be to hold elections, permanent elections. That would be
the best way to renew legitimacy.
The President's Special Envoy, Ambassador Donald Booth, was
in Juba yesterday meeting with President Kiir to continue to
push him to make the compromises necessary to reach that peace
agreement.
Senator Flake. We have a long way to go, though, it is safe
to assume.
Ms. Phee. It is a challenging task ahead of all of us. One
good sign is the fact that so many are unified in wanting to
see an end to this conflict. The neighbors, the African Union,
the United Nations, China is supporting us in this effort. So,
hopefully, if we continue to speak with a collective voice, we
will be able to make an impact.
And in that regard, Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the
Congress for its efforts. Its statements, its meetings, its
calls, have helped reinforce that message to the South Sudanese
leaders that it is time to make compromise.
Senator Flake. The countries in the region are playing a
role through the regional organization, but Uganda has kind of
played an outsized role there. Has that been negative or
positive or both? I know there have been some issues with some
of the troops.
Ms. Phee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. IGAD has had a tough
time, but I think it is important to recognize that any peace
agreement that is reached will need the support of its
neighbors to be fully effective. So we continue to engage with
them to work closely with them to try and help them reach the
shared goal that we all have of seeing an end to the conflict.
Senator Flake. You mentioned one of your roles, as it is
for every Ambassador, to protect U.S. citizens who happen to be
traveling there. To what extent do we have U.S. citizens--I am
assuming it is mostly those in the Sudanese diaspora. What kind
of visits are they on right now? I mean, are there other many
visits going on?
Ms. Phee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for raising that point.
The State Department last issued a travel warning for South
Sudan advising American citizens not to travel there because of
the current conflict. We did that in January of this year. So
you are absolutely correct. The primary set of visitors from
the United States are members of the diaspora, who, like us,
care very deeply about this situation and are trying to support
a positive resolution.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Ms. Butts, when we spoke in my office, you were talking
about the pretty robust presence that we have there given our
interest in all the travel, 6,000 visits a year. Can you
describe how many State Department employees, roughly, and how
many folks from Customs and other agencies of government there
are there?
Ms. Butts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Nassau is distinct as a
post in that there are actually fewer State Department
employees in Nassau than there are Homeland Security employees.
Actually, there is more of a Homeland Security presence there
from Customs and Border Protection, and a lot of the work that
we do around immigration and trying to deter irregular
migration. There is a significant Coast Guard presence in
Nassau. So in total, we have a little over 200 staff with about
20-plus on the State Department side, and about 70 for Homeland
Security, and then other agencies are also included. We have a
few from DOJ. We have, of course, have a military attache at
post.
And as you appreciate, it is an archipelago, so there are a
number of islands. So in Freeport, for example, there is a
significant Customs and Border Protection presence, because of
preclearance for flights that go between the United States and
between the Bahamas.
So it is a distinct post in both the size and the
composition of the staff at post.
Senator Flake. A lot of your function will be coordinating
then, I assume?
Ms. Butts. It will, and that is actually one of the
challenges of the post. Things have been working very well. The
Charge there, Lisa Johnson, is actually with us today and has
done a great job waiting for an ambassador.
But the coordination is a significant part. Fortunately,
the agencies work very well together, and we have a very, very
robust coordinated effort in dealing with illicit trafficking
and dealing with irregular migration.
Senator Flake. Well, thank you.
Ms. Dhanani, can you describe the security situation
currently in-country? My understanding is that you will not be
stationed in the country, initially. You will operate from
Nairobi. We have a secured facility at the airport, I guess.
Can you kind of describe the challenges that we have there,
and what the timetable might be for you to actually be in-
country for more than a few days at a time, I should say?
Ms. Dhanani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and you have
identified one of the major issues that will be preoccupying
me.
I go to Nairobi with a mission of reestablishing a
permanent diplomatic presence in Mogadishu, but that will
depend on improvements in the security circumstances on the
ground. We have adopted a policy that involves continual
monitoring of the security environment and phased reengagement.
The phase that we currently stand at allows us to have members
of the U.S. Government team enter Mogadishu for periods of up
to 2 weeks, to stay for periods as long as 2 weeks. But we can
only have a limited presence in Mogadishu at any given time.
And at the moment, our assessment of the security situation
does not permit us to move beyond the airport. Clearly, we need
to see improvement in the security situation what will allow us
to have greater access to all of Mogadishu, as well as have
greater numbers of people on the ground at the airport. So
there are limitations today, but it is an enormously improved
situation to what it was as little as 2 years ago.
During the last year, the team in the Somalia unit and the
U.S. Government employees made 161 trips into Somalia. They
visited Mogadishu. They visited many of the regional capitals.
They have really had an opportunity to substantially expand
their engagement.
As I am there, I will be engaged in constant risk
monitoring, risk mitigation, and risk management as we seek to
take advantage of improved security to move further and engage
further in the pursuit of the objectives that we have in
Somalia.
Senator Flake. A little more complicated than finding a
real estate agent and looking for a residence then, I assume.
Well, thank you.
Mr. Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
Ms. Phee, could you talk about a year later after the
United States announced sanctions against South Sudan, in terms
of the cooperation we are getting from the EU in ensuring the
effectiveness of our policy?
Ms. Phee. Thank you very much for that question.
The resolution that was adopted earlier this month in the
Security Council was a unanimous resolution that established a
framework to impose international targeted sanctions. That
unanimous resolution follows individual steps by the United
States, where the President has used his Executive authority,
as well as action by the EU to impose EU's targeted sanctions.
So we are now ready to use the forum in the Security Council as
a tool to support the peace negotiations.
I think, in sum, I would characterize the EU posture as
complementary to our own and adding to the collective pressure
to reach an end to the conflict.
Senator Markey. Ms. Dhanani, how would you characterize al-
Shabaab's relationship with al-Qaeda in all of it is
manifestations? And how would you describe al-Shabaab's ability
to recruit outside of its region, to further destabilize the
area?
Ms. Dhanani. Senator Markey, al-Shabaab has formally
affiliated with al-Qaeda, so when we engage or consider
engagement regarding al-Shabaab, we treat al-Shabaab as we
would al-Qaeda.
A very worrying aspect of the crisis in Somalia in recent
years has been the effect that it has had on Somalia's
neighbors. Certainly, in Kenya, in the Westgate mall attack
last year, but also throughout the region in Uganda, Djibouti,
and elsewhere, there have been incidents. There have been
attacks--some successful, some unsuccessful--that have their
roots in al-Shabaab.
And it is for that reason that Somalia's neighbors have
formed the bulk of the force that we are supporting as they
seek to reverse the gains of al-Shabaab.
Senator Markey. What is al-Shabaab's largest source of
revenue today?
Ms. Dhanani. My understanding, sir, Ranking Member Markey,
is that al-Shabaab continues to rely on charcoal trade, taxes
that they achieve through the charcoal trade, and also through
extortion.
They no longer control cities. They no longer control large
areas. But they are present in various places in the country.
Their resources are much more limited than they were when they
controlled a large part of the country, but they still have
access in a number of places.
Senator Markey. Okay, thank you.
Mr. Folmsbee, can you talk a little bit about the French
presence in Mali, its military there, what role it is playing,
what success it is enjoying or not enjoying? Just give us a
little bit of an overview of the French role right now in that
country.
Mr. Folmsbee. Well, thank you for that question, Senator.
The French role has been critical. The French went into
Mali in 2013 and drove al-Qaeda out of the Northern areas. We
have heavily supported that activity, mostly in logistics, but
the French have done a lot of good work there. Also with
training and setting up MINUSMA, they have also played a key
role, although they are also assisting directly with the Malian
Army as well, where there have been some difficulties. So they
played a very key role.
Senator Markey. What is it going to take for the rebels to
agree to a peace deal, in your opinion?
Mr. Folmsbee. Well, that is a good question. You know, I
think the fundamental issue is going to come down to the
government and the northern groups, led in part by MNLA, to
agree to some terminologies relating to the devolution of
authority and power.
I do not know if I see the end of that just yet, but I am
hopeful that we will get there. So I think we can hope that
will come.
Senator Markey. Okay, great, thank you.
Ms. Butts, who I have known for 20 years, can you talk a
little bit about the immigration policy in the Bahamas and the
questions that are being raised about the barriers that are
being erected to being able to gain citizenship and not living
in a stateless status? Could you give your overview of what
that situation looks like today?
Ms. Butts. Yes, absolutely. Thank you, Ranking Member
Markey.
We work in a coordinated effort with the Bahamians to
patrol both sea and surface patrols to deter irregular
migration in the region, but also to interdict irregular
migration when we have the opportunity to do so. It is my
understanding that migrants coming through the area are
principally Haitian and Cuban migrants who stop off in the
Bahamas, and ultimately want to make their way to the United
States.
If I am confirmed, one of the things that I will urge the
Bahamian Government is to ensure that they are following
international standards in how they are managing irregular
migration with the support of the United States as we have
supported them in the past.
There are significant pockets of migrants in the Bahamas.
There is a large Bahamian-Haitian community in the Bahamas. As
you are probably aware, Senator Markey, there has been a change
in the policy of the Bahamian Government. It actually went into
effect in November 2014. It now requires that migrants who are
in the country actually have passports of their countries of
nationality, and they also have documentation that they can
legally be in the Bahamas.
There have been concerns that have been raised by the
Bahamian-Haitian community and by human rights advocates that
the implementation of the policy has unfairly targeted Haitian
communities, and that the Haitians or that the detainees who
are being detained as a result of the policy in the detention
facility are not being treated to international standards.
I will, certainly, urge while I am there, if I am
confirmed, that the Bahamians follow international standards in
how they are implementing their immigrant policy and also how
they are maintaining the detention facilities.
As you are aware, Senator Markey, I have worked for a
number of years on issues related to migration. These are
things that I care about, I understand, and I look forward to
having the opportunity, if confirmed, to engage on the issue.
I am very confident, though, that the Bahamians have robust
democratic institutions, and they will be able to address these
concerns with the help of the U.S. Government and also the
international community, and I look forward to engaging.
Senator Markey. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
We will do one more round, if that is all right.
Mr. Folmsbee, do we know who is responsible for the latest
attacks on the MINUSMA forces?
Mr. Folmsbee. In the north, yes, I believe there is very
good intel on that. This is an open session, and I do not know
if it is out in the public yet. But there is good intel on
that.
There were also attacks in Bamako, and al-Mourabitoun
actually has claimed responsibility for those attacks.
Senator Flake. Do we know what is leading to this increase
in attacks?
Mr. Folmsbee. Well, it is very clear that some of the
Tuareg extremists groups are looking to put pressure on the
government as it relates to the peace talks. I think there is
little doubt about that.
But I also think that they will be thwarted. I think there
is a lot of pressure back against them.
Senator Flake. As far as the U.S. Government is concerned,
do we have the right mix in civilian and military tools for you
in the country?
Mr. Folmsbee. I think we do, but I will also say, if
confirmed, I am, certainly, going to be looking at that,
because that is a fair question. The key issue is going to
ultimately be what is the north--the opportunity for the
government is really to make inroads to the north. There have
to be paved roads up there. There have to be jobs up there.
There have to be hospitals up there.
So if the government does not swing around with that, our
actions will not matter that much. So we have to make sure that
the government takes that on.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Ms. Phee, you mentioned in your testimony, the U.N.
Security Council on March 3 resolution established a targeted
sanctions regime, even proposed an arms embargo that could be
imposed, should these South Sudanese officials not respond to
mediation. What effect do you believe that would have,
particularly the arms embargo that is talked about?
Ms. Phee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The objective of the
resolution was to send sort of an unequivocal signal to the
parties that they were at a crossroads, that it is really time.
This conflict has gone on too long. The humanitarian
consequences are devastating. And it is time to reach an end
and find a way forward.
So it was an effort to provide the negotiators with a tool
to convince both sides that there is no self-interest in
sustaining the conflict. That is the objective of the
resolution. It is tied very closely to the progress of the
negotiations, particularly, as I mentioned, this new effort by
IGAD to reformulate the negotiating process, and, frankly, to
provide a more direct role for outsiders such as ourselves to
be engaged and hopefully bring this over the finish line.
Senator Flake. All right, well, thank you.
Ms. Butts, we have cooperation with the government with
regard to drug interdiction, with the Bahamian Government. Can
that be improved, or is that considered good? How would you
characterize it?
Ms. Butts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have made tremendous
progress in that area. As you are aware, during the 1980s there
was very robust trafficking, a lane through the Bahamas. And at
that point in the 1980s, about 80 percent of the cocaine that
came to the United States actually came through the Bahamas.
Since then, we have actually established a very robust
partnership that is focused on our OPBAT task force. As
recently as 2011, actually 10 percent of the cocaine coming to
the United States actually came through the Bahamas, and so we
have had tremendous success in that regard.
Unfortunately, over the past couple of years, Mr. Chairman,
we have seen a bit of an uptick in what was 10 percent in 2011,
has now become about 14 percent. So we are doing well. We can,
certainly, do better. We could, certainly, use additional
resources to fight illicit narcotics coming through. But we
have a very strong partnership with the Bahamians on that area.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Ms. Dhanani, what do you think the prospects are for
elections that are scheduled to be held next year? And given a
very complicated arrangement with the government appointed, as
opposed to elected, how credible will that be seen around the
country, if these elections are actually held?
Ms. Dhanani. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I think you have
touched on an extremely important factor. We need a Government
of Somalia that is a representative government, that the people
feel is answerable to them, and that is representative to all
the regions of the country in order to have stability going
forward.
The existing Federal Government of Somalia was selected.
Elders selected the Parliament, and the Parliament nominated
the President, and there is a degree of representivity, but not
to the extent that we require.
That government, however, has defined and outlined a
detailed roadmap toward representative government. ``Vision
2016'' is the name of this roadmap. It is a roadmap that we and
the rest of the international community are supporting.
It includes a number of steps on which the deadlines have
already been missed, quite frankly. We are currently focused on
urging the Somalis to make progress toward restoring that
schedule, making progress toward establishing a constitution.
Creating a federal system is a very complicated task. When
we think of what our Founding Fathers achieved and the
stability of the United States, it is quite remarkable. This is
the challenge that faces Somalis today. And we are supporting
the vision that they have outlined, and we are urging, along
with our friends and throughout the international community,
that they stick to this plan that they have defined for
themselves.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
Mr. Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Each of you is extremely well-qualified. Life's work has
prepared you for the jobs which you are being nominated to take
on for our country. What I would like you to, perhaps, give us
is, in each one of your own words, your hopes for what you will
be remembered for in your ambassadorship, what achievement you
want to have left behind when your service has been completed.
I am going to ask each one of you to give me a sense of what it
is that you would like to have left as your legacy.
We will begin with you, Mr. Folmsbee.
Mr. Folmsbee. This is really a great opportunity to talk
about that, so thank you for that question.
I think the key element and concern I have for Mali is the
divide where the Niger River runs across the country. Everybody
to the north has never really been connected to everyone to the
south. So you have this cycle of conflict that has been going
on for 50 years and probably much longer, actually.
I think the opportunity for all of us in the diplomatic
community and the government is to help connect that. That is
going to be through education and other areas, as well as in
security.
So I hope that is the legacy that someone like myself and
our whole team can leave behind, making that connection. That
is going to make a big difference that will help stabilize that
country.
That is what I am going to do, if confirmed.
Senator Markey. Thank you, sir.
Ms. Phee.
Ms. Phee. Thank you, Ranking Member Markey, for your
support. If I were to be confirmed, I would be the second U.S.
Ambassador to the Republic of South Sudan, so that raises a
question: Who wants to be second, right? Generally speaking,
second is not a positive space.
But in this instance, I think second is very important and
very special, because I would symbolize United States
commitment to the people of South Sudan. We are there in the
tough times, as well as the more fun times, as was experienced
in 2011 when the new state was established.
So, moreover, I would also follow, I think, in the
footsteps of so many Americans, students, church groups,
activists, Members of Congress, members of so many
administrations who have cared for so long for the people of
South Sudan and all the suffering they have experienced.
So I would be proud to stand second behind all those folks,
and represent U.S. commitment to helping get this right.
Senator Markey. Thank you.
Ms. Butts.
Ms. Butts. Thank you, Ranking Member Markey.
There is so much that I want to do. If I had to boil it
down, I would say, just overall strengthening the bilateral
relationship, furthering social and economic justice in the
country. Certainly, building on and enforcing and supporting
human rights for all the people of the Bahamas, and just more
within the mission, within post, strengthening management,
improving morale, showing that the people who work at post are
valued and all of their efforts are appreciated.
So I hope that my legacy is both inside appreciating the
people who work at post, and outside reflecting the best of
U.S. values and the best that we have to offer in America.
Senator Markey. Thank you.
Ms. Dhanani.
Ms. Dhanani. Thank you, Senator Markey.
I think I have a small advantage here. Unlike my colleague
nominated for South Sudan, I will be the first in sometime, and
therefore, I have that advantage in a sense.
You know, the step of deciding to nominate someone to serve
as Ambassador to Somalia represented the progress that was the
result of a lot of hard work that many people, including many
of my colleagues in the U.S. Government, put in over the last
few years. So in a sense, my nomination is a tribute to the
efforts that they made.
Similarly, I would hope the efforts that I and my team make
will take us to that next step, the step of establishing a
permanent diplomatic presence in Mogadishu. I think that step
will be important in itself, but it will be even more important
because it will be a sign that so many things have continued to
move in a favorable direction, and that Somalia is getting
closer and closer to being the kind of peaceful, secure,
unified, stable place that we would all like to see it become.
Senator Markey. Thank you.
Well, you are an extraordinary group, and we thank you for
your willingness to serve our country.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
I want to note the presence of the Deputy Chief of Mission,
Chet Neymour, from the Bahamas here.
I want to thank all of you for your testimony and for being
here. Thank you for your service. And hearing your remarks and
looking at your resumes, it is apparent that you have all been
at this awhile. And I know that sometimes our diplomatic
efforts are overlooked by the general populace. You are not
given the opportunity to board an airplane first or things like
that sometimes that another branch of our government seems to
get noticed for. But I want you to know that we here appreciate
what you do, and we are grateful for your sacrifice and for the
sacrifice of your families. The risks, we know that the risks
out there that you expose yourselves to as well, and they are
not insignificant, particularly with many of these assignments.
So thank you for what you do. Thank you for being here.
For the information of members, the record will remain open
until the close of business on Friday, March 27. This will
include time for members to submit questions for the record. We
would ask you to respond to these questions quickly. Your
responses will be made part of the record as well.
Senator Flake. With the thanks to the committee, this
hearing is now adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:12 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Paul A. Folmsbee, Nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Mali, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate folmsbee's reponses
to questions from senator corker
Question. What further influence will the United States utilize
through your offices or other means to compel greater compromise and
collaboration in seeking sustainable peace, especially by the long-
standing intransigent government and officials in the southern portion
of the country? How will you work with the Government of Mali in
addressing marginalization in the north?
Answer. The United States is engaged in robust diplomatic outreach
to urge all parties in Mali to commit immediately to the March 1, 2015,
peace agreement. We are working closely with the Government of Mali to
support improved service
delivery to northern Mali and are considering ways we could support a
final peace agreement.
Right now, the United States is supporting a variety of efforts
designed to promote peace and reconciliation in northern Mali,
including translating, printing, and disseminating 30,000 copies of the
peace agreement in local languages; empowering grassroots civil society
peace campaigns through hundreds of local forums and discussions;
promulgating radio and television programming and targeted SMS text
messages reaching millions of Malians; and strengthening national-level
institutions charged with resolving the crisis, such as through
creating a communications cell in the Ministry of National
Reconciliation and improving the capability of justice and civilian
security institutions to provide vital services in the north.
Question. What are the positions of the United States, France, and
neighboring states on the prospect of federalism or autonomy for
northern Mali? How such reorganization affect U.S. policy in Mali?
Answer. The United States, together with France and other key
international partners, strongly supports the June 2013 Ouagadougou
Accord. This framework agreement, signed by both the Government of Mali
and the northern armed groups, reinforces the international community's
commitment to the territorial integrity of the Malian state.
Question. MINUMSA signals a shift in the context of United Nations
peacekeeping operations in which peacekeepers are combating an
extremist presence. Does the United States support U.N. peacekeeping as
peace enforcement?
Answer. Today, two-thirds of U.N. peacekeepers are operating in
active conflict areas, many with a chapter VII mandate of peace
enforcement. The United States has supported that mandate for these
missions. Some of these chapter VII mandated missions involve peace
enforcement in situations involving extremists. MINUSMA does not
necessarily represent a shift in the chapter VII operating environment.
MINUSMA's mandate, under chapter VII authority, to protect
civilians and support the Malian authorities in stabilization efforts
and to take steps to deter threats and prevent the return of armed
elements, is one part of a broader strategy, including political
engagement, to bring stability to northern Mali.
Question. How does the lack of an AFRICOM jurisdictional boundary
in the Sahel region benefit U.S. Government efforts in dealing with the
instability in Mali? What benefits would State Department realize if
there was a unified region under one Regional Bureau? How does State
Department work through the range of regional and bilateral programming
applied to counter terrorism, transborder criminal trafficking and
activity, build governance and economic capacity, train, equip, advise
and assist security forces, and respond to humanitarian and human
rights crises?
Answer. Through the Trans-Sahara Counter Terrorism Program (TSCTP),
the United States is working to address transborder issues in Mali and
the Sahel. TSCTP supports programs that strengthen the Government of
Mali's operational and tactical abilities to combat terrorism and
programs designed to ensure that Malians remain unreceptive to
extremist messages.
Programs designed to strengthen Mali's counterterrorism
capabilities include:
Antiterrorism Assistance (ATA) training for law
enforcement. This program provides police with training needed
to protect facilities, individuals, and infrastructure from
terrorist attacks and respond to major crises such as hostage
takings.
Establishment of a Legal Advisor from Department of Justice
beginning in calendar year 2014.
Programs designed to counter violent extremism include:
Installation of community radio stations in the most remote
regions of northern Mali and support for radio programming;
Support for small scale-community infrastructure such as
school rehabilitation and well projects;
Engagement with ``medersas,'' which in Mali are Islamic
versions of parochial schools that teach secular subjects and
are very different from ``madrasas'' or Koranic schools;
Publishing and distribution of 56,600 Arabic-language
civics textbooks to medersas for the 2011-2012 school year;
Cultural and educational exchange programs and the
preservation of ancient Islamic manuscripts;
Capacity-building for local government officials and
institutions to support decentralization and democratic
governance; and
Skills training for youth, including a just launched USAID/
Mali Out-of-School Youth Project (Projet d'Appui aux Jeunes
Entrepreneurs) that provides out-of-school youth, ages 14-25,
with low literacy skills nonformal basic education instruction,
technical and work readiness training, as well as training in
entrepreneurship and leadership.
__________
ambassador-designate folmsbee's responses
to questions from senator menendez
Question. What are the most important actions you have taken in
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What is the
impact of your actions? Why were your actions significant?
Answer. As the Senior Civilian Representative embedded with
Regional Command East in Afghanistan from 2011 to 2012 and as
Provincial Reconstruction Team Leader embedded with the 2/82 Airborne
in Sadr City and Adhamiya, Baghdad, Iraq from 2007 to 2008, I am proud
of the work I did to promote stability, strengthen democracy and
protect human rights in two dangerous but vitally important places. If
confirmed, I will draw on my experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan, among
others, to emphasize the importance of protecting human rights and
promoting justice as we work to support the national reconciliation
process in Mali.
Question. What are the most pressing human rights issues in Mali?
What are the most important steps you expect to take--if confirmed--to
promote human rights and democracy in Mali? What do you hope to
accomplish through these actions?
Answer. The 2013 inauguration of President Keita and the
establishment of a new National Assembly through free and fair
elections ended a 16-month transitional period following the 2012
military coup, armed rebellion, and terrorist occupation of the north.
The restoration of a democratic government and the arrest of coup
leader Amadou Sanogo restored some civilian control over the military.
The 2013 international military intervention helped to eradicate
terrorists and the resumption of peace talks with armed groups has
decreased armed conflict.
However, problems exist in some areas. These include ineffective
civilian control over security forces and impunity toward the military;
acts of sexual violence, summary execution, torture, and use of child
soldiers by armed groups; killing of civilians and military forces
including peacekeepers by violent extremists; trafficking in persons
and exploitative labor, including child labor; and judicial
inefficiency, poor prison conditions, arbitrary arrest and detention,
lengthy pretrial detention prolonged trial delays, and lack of access
to justice in the North.
If confirmed, I will continue Embassy Bamako's extensive diplomatic
outreach and programming in support of the peace process and a national
reconciliation process that will provide justice and accountability.
Question. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
previous response? What challenges will you face in Mali in advancing
human rights and democracy in general?
Answer. The Government of Mali took strong initial steps to advance
justice and fight impunity from prosecution, most notably with the
imprisonment and ongoing investigation against coup leader Amadou
Sanogo and 28 other individuals implicated in extrajudicial killings
and forced disappearances committed in the aftermath of the coup
d'etat. Judge Yaya Karambe helped drive this fight against impunity as
he worked under constant threat from Sanogo's supporters to gather
evidence and arrest suspects, culminating in his uncovering a mass-
grave with 21 missing Red Beret soldiers in December 2013.
These efforts are laudable, but I am concerned about the lack of
progress in pursuing justice for victims of terrorism or human rights
abuses that occurred during the occupation of northern Mali. Human
rights abuses committed in northern Mali on all sides of the conflict
have not been addressed and remain a sticking point in the
reconciliation process. The capacity of the justice sector is
significantly limited in the north, as judicial officials have been
slow to return over continued fears of insecurity. Human rights
organizations documented various abuses committed during and after the
conflict, including northern armed groups which killed, raped, and
abused soldiers and civilians during the 2012 invasion, and Malian
Armed Forces which committed summary executions, torture, and forced
disappearances upon retaking territory in early 2013.
Question. Are you committed to meeting with human rights and other
nongovernmental organizations in the United States and with local human
rights NGOs in Mali?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with
nongovernmental organizations in both the United States and Mali to
solidify Mali's democratic transition and promote human rights.
Question. If confirmed, please describe steps that you will take to
enhance effective implementation of Section 620M of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known as the Leahy amendment, within
the Embassy in Mali as well as steps you would take to accomplish the
goal of the law, namely, helping the Government of Mali end impunity
for human rights violations by security forces.
Answer. If confirmed, I will work to strengthen security sector
institutions in Mali by promoting accountability and civilian control.
Careful attention to the Leahy vetting process is critical in assuring
that this assistance reaches only those individuals within Mali's
security forces who are not implicated in abuses of human rights and
can be credible advocates for reform and professionalization through
participation in a meaningful national reconciliation process that
emphasizes respect for human rights of all Malians.
Question. After days of protests in the north and a rejection of
the recent peace proposal by Tuareg rebels, the Malian Government
announced that it would no longer negotiate on the future of the north.
What are the implications of the recent stalemate over a
peace deal?
Answer. Failure of the parties to reach an agreement risks further
violence and increased alienation by the northern populations. However,
the agreement would be only a first step toward peace, security, and
development in the polarized communities in the north. Without a peace
agreement and follow-on action to resolve long-standing issues that
divide Bamako and the north, violent extremists will continue to make
northern Mali insecure. This insecurity has increased, with more
frequent attacks against civilians, the United Nations Multidimensional
Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali (MINUSMA ), and the French
forces of Operation Barkhane.
Upon signing a peace agreement, the opportunity for the Government
of Mali is to noticeably establish a real presence in the north with
hospitals, paved roads, schools, and expanding economic development.
The United States will do all it can to assist the government in that
initiative.
Question. In your written testimony, you referenced the need to
reform the Malian security sector. Mali is one of six partner countries
for the administration's new Security Governance Initiative (SGI).
What is the status of the development of SGI programming in
Mali?
What has been achieved through existing security sector
assistance programs such as the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism
Partnership (TSCTP)?
What lessons can be drawn from TSTCP to inform efforts
under SGI?
Answer. An interagency Security Governance Initiative (SGI) team
visited Mali in February to consult with Malian partners on potential
areas for SGI engagement. Expert teams will reengage with Malian
counterparts to develop joint country action plans and programs.
Trans-Sahara Counter Terrorism Program (TSCTP) activities in Mali
remain very targeted to specific sectors and activities. We have small
programs focused on law enforcement, justice sector, and corrections
reform and Antiterrorism Assistance programming on crisis response and
terrorist interdiction. In part this is due to the significant European
Union program underway there that permits us to be more selective in
our engagement. This year TSCTP supported the deployment of Law
Enforcement and Resident Legal Advisors to assist in civilian security
and justice sector reform. In addition, TSCTP supports several
countering violent extremism (CVE) programs promoting peace building,
reconciliation, and tolerance. Overall, the United States is focusing
on broader security sector reform and political reconciliation before
committing to the same kind of tactical training and equipping of
counterterrorism units.
TSCTP's experience in Mali and elsewhere in the Sahel and Maghreb
provides several important lessons which may benefit SGI efforts. Our
experience in Mali highlighted the importance of addressing state
weakness and focusing on institutional resilience as key parts of our
overall engagement strategy. Before the fall of the Toure Government,
TSCTP focused on tactical-level training for various Malian units and
the underlying state weaknesses were not sufficiently addressed.
Consequently, when the units were deployed without adequate leadership
or logistical support, they quickly collapsed. By contrast, TSCTP has
intensified its focus on building more sustainable capabilities in
Chad, Mauritania, and Niger and invested in defense and civilian
security institutions. Capacities in those countries remain nascent in
many sectors, but we have seen benefits to the approach as they have
responded to threats along multiple borders from Mali, Nigeria, and
Libya.
Question. Mr. Folmsbee, you alluded to the north-south divide in
Mali that has contributed to cycles of conflict. The integration of
Tuareg citizens into the broader society has been an ongoing challenge,
not only in Mali, but elsewhere in the Sahel.
If confirmed as Ambassador, how do you plan to work with
the Malian Government, civil society organizations, and other
stakeholders to work toward this goal?
Answer. National reconciliation is a top U.S. policy priority in
Mali. If confirmed, I plan to continue working to promote national
reconciliation through partnerships with civil society and the Malian
Government and by participating in the peace talks as needed.
Additionally, with USAID programming, we will promote economic growth
and the health sector to help tie the north to the rest of the country.
In direct support of the peace talks, our efforts will include
translating, printing, and disseminating 30,000 peace process documents
in local languages; empowering grassroots civil society peace campaigns
through hundreds of local forums and discussions; promulgating radio
and television programming and targeted SMS text messages reaching
millions of Malians; and strengthening national-level institutions
charged with resolving the crisis, such as through creating a
communications cell in the Ministry of National Reconciliation.
__________
ambassador-designate folmsbee's responses
to questions from senator flake
Question. What more, if anything, can be done to stimulate economic
growth and alleviate poverty in Mali? What are the most significant
U.S. commercial interests in Mali? What is the environment for U.S.
businesses and investors, and how might it be improved?
Answer. Mali faces formidable challenges to economic development.
Its economy is heavily dependent on agriculture, which makes up 45
percent of GDP and provides income for 75 percent of the country's
population.
In order to promote long-lasting food security, the United States
invests in the sustainable development of agriculture through the Feed
the Future (FTF) initiative. Agriculture is a driver of economic
growth, employment, better health, and nutrition, and remains a sector
where Mali has an underexploited comparative advantage.
With an FY 2014 budget of $18 million, FTF works to develop and
reinforce the private sector by targeting opportunities in the
production, processing, and trade of selected commodities in key
geographic areas. USAID/Mali also recently signed a nearly $14 million
dollar Development Credit Authority (DCA) microcredit facility to
support small and medium-size agricultural enterprises as well as
female entrepreneurs.
Question. Would you advise an expansion of U.S. security
assistance? Please describe how the Security Governance Initiative will
be implemented in Mali.
Answer. Rebuilding Mali's security institutions in the wake of the
2012 coup is critical to Mali's capacity to control its porous borders
and vast territory, counter terrorist influences and deny Al Qaeda in
the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) the ability to use northern Mali as a safe
haven. In our meetings with civil society, it is clear that better
security service delivery and access to justice will be a critical
component to any effort to bring stability to the country. Through the
Security Governance Initiative and other complementary programs, we
will support the development of these critical security institutions,
systems and processes to increase accountability and improve security
and justice through transparent and responsive governance.
Question. What is your assessment of security trends in the Sahel?
How might U.S. counterterrorism efforts in Mali and the wider Sahel
best be evaluated and prioritized?
Answer. The continued presence and activities of al-Qaeda
affiliates, including Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM), other
armed extremists and transnational criminal groups in northern Mali,
threatens both Mali and the broader Sahel region. Ensuring that Malians
continue to reject extremist messages is a key focus of U.S.
counterterrorism programming in Mali. Our ability to counter extremist
influences depends on a skillful balance of programs designed to
consolidate Malian democracy, support economic growth, deepen mutual
understanding, promote moderate messages, and assist the Malian
Government and local leaders to deliver basic services and counter the
root causes of extremism.
Question. Who is responsible for recent attacks against MINUSMA
forces, and what factors are contributing to their increase? How might
U.S. interagency coordination related to regional counterterrorism be
improved?
Answer. Al-Morabitun and the Movement for the Oneness and Unity of
the Jihad (MUJAO), both groups with ties to Al Qaeda in the Islamic
Maghreb (AQIM), have claimed responsibility for attacks against U.N.
peacekeepers in Mali. Other armed extremists and transnational criminal
groups, coupled with slow progress on national reconciliation between
the Government of Mali and northern groups, have produced an
increasingly insecure environment for the U.N. mission.
We are working closely with the U.N. Department of Peacekeeping
Operations (DPKO), the GOM, troop and police contributing countries
(TCCs/PCCs) and other international partners to support the mission to
better operate in this insecure environment and implement its robust
mandate.
U.S. Africa Command (AFRICOM) recently sponsored an asymmetric
threat assessment team that traveled throughout the MINUSMA area of
operations and is providing recommendations that may reduce peacekeeper
vulnerability and contribute to IED threat mitigation. We are providing
mine-protected combat vehicles for MINUSMA contingents and training
peacekeepers how to use them, and exploring ways to support more C-IED
training for troop contributing countries (TCCs).
In close partnership with MINUSMA's U.N. Police (UNPOL) and the EU
Police capacity-building mission (EUCAP), we have also conducted IED
awareness seminars for the Malian National Police who work in northern
Mali. Additionally, the ACOTA Program has provided Counter-IED training
to TCCs trained and deploying to MINUSMA (Benin, Burkina Faso, Ghana,
Niger, and Togo). During the 7-10 week battalion training, Counter-IED
tasks relevant to an infantry battalion are integrated into command and
staff, soldiers' skills and collective unit training.
Question. Mali's current peace process has gotten bogged down. What
more can the United States do to encourage a peaceful political
resolution? If another deal is struck, what will you do differently
than your predecessors to ensure that this next one, unlike the
previous four peace deals, will stick?
Answer. We are working, with our international partners, to
encourage all parties to sign the Algiers agreement as soon as
possible. We are also considering how the United States could most
effectively support the implementation of this agreement by leveraging
our diplomatic and development assistance resources.
Question. Do we have the mix of civilian and military tools right
in Mali? How will you, as chief of mission, ensure that U.S. civilian
capabilities are not overshadowed by our military?
Answer. We continue to emphasize that the only way to create a
lasting peace in Mali is through a durable political agreement between
the Government of Mali and the northern armed groups. Embassy Bamako's
diplomatic outreach in support of the peace process is a whole-of-
government effort that emphasizes the importance of solidifying Mali's
democratic transition and strengthening security sector institutions.
We are beginning to implement robust civilian security engagement with
the police and justice sector to improve these critical elements of a
stable democracy.
__________
Responses of Mary Catherine Phee, Nominated to be Ambassador to the
Republic of South Sudan, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate phee's responses
to questions from senator corker
Question. Does the United States agree with the 2014 African Union
report that neither antagonist Riek Machar or Salva Kiir should serve
in South Sudan's transitional government?
Answer. The report referred to is a leaked document which the
African Union disavowed in an official statement on March 16. Our view
is that the two leaders need to make compromises to reach a peace
agreement and form a transitional government that can accomplish
essential transitional tasks such as holding elections for a permanent
government and establishing a hybrid judicial body to promote
accountability and justice.
Question. How will U.S. influence on South Sudan's warring parties
be affected by the expansion of the IGAD peace talks beyond IGAD member
states?
Answer. ``IGAD Plus,'' as proposed by IGAD Chairman, Ethiopian
Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalgn, envisions additional leverage on
the warring parties though enhanced international participation and
cooperation, bolstering the negotiation efforts of the current IGAD
leadership. This includes participation by the African Union, which has
selected five African heads of state for this purpose, the Troika
(United States, United Kingdom, and Norway), the U.N., the EU, and
China.
A reformed and reinvigorated ``IGAD Plus'' process would unite a
number of stakeholders and members of the international community
behind a common peace plan and gives international partners, including
the United States, a larger role in shaping process and substance. The
United States will continue to look for further opportunities to
enhance the IGAD mediation process and will lead international efforts
to bring additional pressure upon the parties to shift their concern
toward the people of South Sudan, instead of their narrow political
interests.
Question. How do you assess the relationship between UNMISS
peacekeepers and humanitarian organizations in fulfilling the
protection of civilians mandate?
Answer. UNMISS is mandated to protect civilians with support from
its 11, 669-person strong military force. This U.N. mission has four
priorities: protection of civilians, monitoring and investigating human
rights, creating the conditions for the delivery of humanitarian
assistance, and supporting the implementation of the Cessation of
Hostilities agreement.
UNMISS has established seven protection of civilian sites for
internally displaced persons and is protecting nearly 113,000 IDPs in
these sites. In tandem with humanitarian organizations, UNMISS is
providing assistance to civilians at these sites as well as to those
displaced elsewhere in the country. The partnership between UNMISS and
the humanitarian organizations is vital and robust and we continue to
encourage both sides to cooperate with these efforts.
Recent troop deployments from Kenya, China, and Ghana will enable
UNMISS to conduct its protection tasks more effectively, including
patrols and proactive community engagement. Inadequate infrastructure,
difficult weather conditions, and access challenges posed by the
parties in conflict hinder UNMISS' ability to fully execute its
mandate.
Question. How will you ensure the United States does not enter into
an agreement that perpetuates the failures of the 2005 CPA that left
unresolved significant interethnic rivalries and challenges?
Answer. Recalling the scale and devastation of the Sudanese civil
wars, which exacted tremendous human cost over two decades, the CPA was
a critically important accomplishment that ended the fighting.
Unfortunately, the parties to the CPA did not implement many of the
important provisions designed to build institutions that would
facilitate development and good governance throughout Sudan and what is
now South Sudan. If confirmed, I will work to encourage both parties to
end the current conflict in South Sudan and establish a transitional
government that begins to address these longstanding challenges. The
primary criticism of the CPA is that the official parties lacked
diversity and inclusivity. I will seek to engage all stakeholders and
encourage their participation in developing broad-based institutions
and sustainable development.
__________
ambassador-designate phee's responses
to questions from senator menendez
Question. What are the most important actions you have taken in
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What is the
impact of your actions? Why were your actions significant?
Answer. I have had the opportunity to directly advance human rights
and democracy in nearly every assignment in my career and expect deep
engagement in such efforts in South Sudan, if confirmed.
As a political reporting officer in Cairo, Egypt, from 1997-2000, I
undertook path-breaking reporting on the government's treatment of the
Coptic Christian community and relations between Copts and Muslims. I
convinced USAID to transfer democracy and governance funds to the State
Department and with those funds administered a small grants program
that provided assistance to human rights advocates; significantly,
these grants were not subject to prior approval from the Government of
Egypt.
Examples of the program's beneficiaries include activists working
to combat female genital mutilation and those providing legal
assistance to Egyptians who had been tortured. We also used these funds
to support the travel of Egyptian activists to the United States to
learn about American civil society and judicial processes. Several of
the program's beneficiaries were active in the 2011 Arab Spring.
While administering an occupied province of southern Iraq in 2003-
2004, I arranged for the establishment of a provincial council and
municipal councils with reserved seats for women and religious
minorities who were elected in caucuses from their communities. In
explaining the purpose of reserved seats and the function of caucuses,
I was able to educate local leaders who had no prior experience with
inclusive participatory governance systems and to mobilize previously
oppressed communities.
Most recently, as deputy chief of mission in Addis Ababa from 2011-
2014, I arranged U.S. Government financial support for journalists
fleeing the country who feared persecution, as well as for victims of
Wikileaks. I chaired the mission's interagency working group on
democracy and governance, and pioneered an innovative effort to create
a dialogue between prominent American academics and senior Ethiopian
party leaders about one party states in agrarian-based economies in
East Asia (countries whose economic transformation Ethiopia seeks to
emulate) which had chosen to liberalize politically in order to
illustrate that democratization can bring stability and economic
progress.
Question. What are the most pressing human rights issues in South
Sudan? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in South Sudan? What
do you hope to accomplish through these actions?
Answer. The most pressing human rights issues are ending the war,
promoting accountability and addressing the needs of those displaced by
the conflict. If confirmed I intend to support efforts to hold
accountable those who have committed human rights violations, abuses,
and other atrocities in this conflict. We have pledged to work with the
South Sudanese, the AU, regional partners, and the U.N. to promote
accountability for abuses committed in this conflict.
I will also support efforts to combat gender-based violence and the
recruitment of child soldiers. I will promote the expansion of civic
space for alternative voices and the role of a free press. I will reach
out to local government officials, professional associations, civil
society organizations, youth, women, and traditional leaders to promote
human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
Question. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
previous response? What challenges will you face in South Sudan in
advancing human rights and democracy in general?
Answer. In South Sudan there is a history of impunity for human
rights abuses and violations. South Sudan also lacks strong
institutions capable of enforcing the rule of law. Building local
capacity and facilitating reconciliation among the people of South
Sudan is a long-term challenge and will require the consistent support
of the friends of the South Sudanese.
Question. Are you committed to meeting with human rights and other
nongovernmental organizations in the United States and with local human
rights NGOs in South Sudan?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working with human rights
groups and other nongovernmental organizations, both local and
international. I will reinforce current U.S. engagement with civil
society and other South Sudanese and international partners to promote
human rights.
Question. If confirmed, please describe steps that you will take to
enhance effective implementation of Section 620 M of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known as the Leahy amendment, within
the Embassy in South Sudan as well as steps you would take to
accomplish the goal of the law, namely, helping the Government of South
Sudan end impunity for human rights violations by security forces.
Answer. All U.S. Government assistance to the defense sector was
suspended shortly after the outbreak of the current conflict. We remain
concerned about the conduct of both the Government of South Sudan and
opposition forces.
The United States has urged the African Union Peace and Security
Council to immediately release the report of the African Union's
Commission of Inquiry, which was charged with developing findings
regarding violations of international human rights and international
humanitarian law committed during the armed conflict, and formulating
recommendations on the best ways and means to ensure accountability,
reconciliation, and healing. We are prepared to support mechanisms that
advance these goals. When the parties achieve a lasting peace and we
review the possibility of providing assistance for security sector
reform, I will work to ensure that all relevant U.S. Government
agencies and offices are working together and actively sharing
information to ensure the Leahy law is being fully implemented.
Question. The Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan has the lead
role in directly engaging with the Intergovernmental Authority on
Development and parties to the conflict in South Sudan as part of
ongoing peace negotiations.
a. What is your role if any, in the peace process? In what
ways will you work to bring an end to the civil war?
b. In the event that the latest round of talks--reported to
be scheduled for some time in April--do not result in an
agreement, what next steps will the United States take to bring
about an end to the conflict?
c. How much information do ordinary citizens have about the
peace process, and how are their interests being represented in
negotiations?
Answer. a. If confirmed, I, in coordination with the President's
Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan, Ambassador Donald Booth, will
steadfastly engage both parties on the need to make compromises and to
come to a political agreement. I will also directly engage the people
of South Sudan to promote peace and provide humanitarian assistance
without regard to ethnic or political affiliation.
b. The Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) is now
moving ahead to prepare for a peace summit in the coming weeks, and has
the critical task of engaging stakeholders and members of the
international community to get behind a common peace plan. Ultimately,
however, the decision to end this needless conflict lies with the
warring parties. The United States will continue to look for further
opportunities to enhance the mediation process and will lead
international efforts to bring additional pressure upon the parties. We
are in discussions with our partners in the region and the
international community on how best to support upcoming talks, to
increase pressure on the parties, and to widen international consensus
to support the peace process if these talks fail.
c. Given the high rate of illiteracy, and minimal internet
penetration and newspaper circulation in South Sudan, radio broadcast
is the most effective means to disseminate information. And more of
this is needed. We are working with implementing partners to expand
accurate live broadcast radio coverage of the mediation and to
distribute peace messaging through local partners. We have pressed IGAD
to include a broad range of opposition political parties, civil
society, religious leaders, women, and youth and have provided direct
support to civil society participants in the process so they can
advocate for the South Sudanese people.
Question. On March 24, Parliament voted to extend by 3 years
President Kiir's term in office. Originally set to end on July 9, 2015,
his mandate now expires in 2018.
What was the reasoning behind the extension of President
Salva Kiir's mandate, and what are the repercussions on the
peace process?
Could it affect former Vice President Riek Machar's
willingness to negotiate? How transparent was the process
through which the vote was debated and taken? What effects
might the extension of President Kiir's mandate have on the
development of democracy in South Sudan?
Answer. The Government of the Republic of South Sudan has justified
the extension of its tenure to 2018 to allow more time to achieve a
peaceful settlement. However, this step by the legislature sends a
negative signal about the government's commitment to a transitional
government and for the development of democracy in South Sudan. This
action has created another political grievance for the opposition. We
have been clear that the way to extend legitimacy without elections is
through a negotiated peace agreement in South Sudan and the
establishment of a transitional government.
Question. Administration officials, including Ambassador Booth in
his testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee on February
26, 2014, have stated that things must not ``return to business as
usual'' which seemed to imply that a political solution among elites at
the expense of justice and accountability for crimes committed is
unacceptable.
Are there currently discussions in South Sudan about the
need for accountability for violations of human rights
committed during the course of the conflict?
What grassroots efforts are underway to promote justice,
accountability and reconciliation? Is the United States
supporting such efforts?
Answer. Discussions about the need for accountability have taken
place among those in the Government of the Republic of South Sudan,
opposition forces, Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD)
mediators, and civil society groups. The U.S. Government has
facilitated these discussions through its support for a
multistakeholder peace process. The parties to the conflict have agreed
on general provisions for a legal mechanism to prosecute those
responsible for gross human rights abuses and violations, as well as a
commission for truth, reconciliation, and healing, but no steps have
been taken to put these into place absent a peace agreement. Justice
and accountability are critical elements of a lasting peace.
The United States is encouraging grassroots efforts by South
Sudanese groups and individuals to promote justice, accountability, and
reconciliation. For example, the Department of State is in the process
of funding an in-country South Sudanese civil society-led project to
investigate and document human rights abuses and violations.
Question. There are reports that the Government of South Sudan is
imposing burdensome bureaucratic obstacles such as arbitrary taxation,
expulsion of staff, and a delay in issuing permits, that are making it
difficult for nongovernmental organizations to provide humanitarian
assistance. The United States has provided nearly a billion dollars in
humanitarian assistance this fiscal year, and thus a strong interest in
ensuring that the operating environment is conducive to efficient
provision of assistance.
Are you aware of the reports of bureaucratic obstacles
imposed on organizations trying to carry out lifesaving
humanitarian operations in South Sudan? What will be your role
in helping to ensure they are able to carry out their work
without being harassed or otherwise impeded by government?
Answer. I am aware of such concerning reports, including threats of
expulsion of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), harassment,
abduction, detention, and expulsion of NGO workers, delays in visas and
work permits, denial of tax exemptions, import delays, and bureaucratic
delays in moving cargo by road, river, and air.
If confirmed, I will engage all parties to press for immediate and
unconditional access for humanitarian workers so they can deliver
humanitarian assistance to all South Sudanese people in need. I will
also work with other donor governments and organizations and the U.N.
to help minimize the obstructions to humanitarian aid.
ambassador-designate phee's responses
to questions from senator flake
Question. Does the administration view South Sudan's oil revenues
as contributing to the current conflict, and, if so, are sanctions
against the oil sector being considered?
Answer. We believe that the government revenues are largely being
directed to security spending which makes the search for peace all the
more urgent. At the same time, several factors have significantly
decreased oil revenues for the government, which receives the majority
of its income from oil. The conflict has caused a disruption in total
oil production, which dropped from 220,000 barrels per day (bbl/d) in
November 2013 to 150,000 bbl/d on average in 2014. The drop in the
global price of oil has further reduced South Sudan's oil income.
Production will only be restored to preconflict levels when the parties
cease fighting and provide the security needed for critical repair and
maintenance of oil infrastructure in South Sudan. We are not at this
time considering sanctions against the oil sector.
Question. What is the extent of the Ugandan military deployment in
South Sudan? Are Ugandan forces playing an active role in the fighting?
How does the Obama administration view Uganda's role in the conflict?
Answer. At the request of President Salva Kiir, two brigades of
Ugandan troops were deployed in December 2013 during the initial days
of the conflict to protect key infrastructure and the city of Juba
against opposition forces. Ugandan forces remain in South Sudan at the
invitation of the government.
The Agreement on the Cessation of Hostilities that was brokered by
Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) mediators in January
2014, and signed by both the Government of South Sudan and the
opposition, calls for the withdrawal of foreign forces from South
Sudan. The parties have subsequently rededicated themselves to the
Agreement and we continue to press for its immediate implementation.
We remain continuously engaged with the Government of Uganda to
promote a common strategy for pressing the parties to stop the fighting
and find a negotiated rather than a military solution to the conflict.
Question. Given the role you will play in the peace process, how do
you plan to maintain legitimacy with both sides involved in the
conflict?
Answer. The United States, in coordination with IGAD and our Troika
partners Norway and the United Kingdom, has maintained the firm
position that both parties are responsible for this conflict and the
failure to reach peace. If confirmed, I, in coordination with the
President's Special Envoy for Sudan and South Sudan Ambassador Donald
Booth, will steadfastly engage both parties on the need to make
compromises and to come to a political agreement. I would also directly
engage the people of South Sudan to promote peace and provide
humanitarian assistance without regard to ethnic or political
affiliation.
Question. In your testimony you note that the U.N. Security
Council's March 3 resolution ``established a targeted sanctions regime
and proposed an arms embargo that could be imposed should the South
Sudanese leaders fail to respond to the mediation.''
Do you think the threat of sanctions will be seen as
credible by the parties and encourage them to reach a
compromise?
Are we able to identify significantly influential
individuals for sanctions in both camps?
What impact do you anticipate the arms embargo would have?
How would it the power balance in the conflict?
Answer. The March 3rd U.N. Security Council's sanctions resolution
allows for the imposition of asset freezes and travel bans on those who
hinder the South Sudanese peace process or commit human rights
violations. The resolution established a Sanctions Committee--which
consists of all members of the Security Council--to review information
regarding individuals and entities and designate them for sanctions. A
U.N. Panel of Experts will be formed, which will help the committee
gather and review information about those who may meet the sanctions
designation criteria. Based on the findings of the Panel of Experts and
our own findings, we will propose relevant individuals for
consideration by the Sanctions Committee.
The resolution's credible threat of sanctions increases pressure on
the parties to resolve the outstanding issues and begin a process that
establishes the Transitional Government of National Unity. This
incremental approach hones the efficacy of measures imposed and ensures
continued buy-in and support from IGAD regional leaders.
Under this resolution, the Council has also committed to
periodically review the situation in South Sudan and, as deemed
necessary, consider additional measures, including an arms embargo. The
U.S. Government believes that actions based on this resolution should
be calibrated to maximize the Council's leverage to facilitate an end
to the horrific violence and promote the beginning of a sustainable
settlement. We believe that an arms embargo could pressure both parties
to negotiate earnestly.
Question. How would you assess the capacity of U.N. peacekeepers in
South Sudan to protect civilians? Do UNMISS forces currently have the
capacity to go out on patrols and engage armed actors, if civilians are
under imminent threat?
Answer. UNMISS is mandated to protect civilians with support from
its 11,669-person strong military force. This U.N. mission has four
priorities: protection of civilians, monitoring and investigating human
rights, creating the conditions for the delivery of humanitarian
assistance, and supporting the implementation of the Cessation of
Hostilities agreement.
UNMISS has created seven protection of civilian sites for
internally displaced persons and is protecting nearly 113,000 IDPs in
these sites. The mission works very closely with the humanitarian
community that provides assistance to the IDPs in these sites. Recent
troop deployments from Kenya, China, and Ghana will enable UNMISS to
conduct its protection tasks more effectively, including patrols and
proactive community engagement. Inadequate infrastructure, difficult
weather conditions, and access challenges posed by the armed conflict
hinder UNMISS' ability to fully execute its mandate.
Question. What additional leverage would an ``IGAD Plus'' bring to
bear?
Answer. ``IGAD Plus,'' as proposed by IGAD Chairman, Ethiopian
Prime Minister Hailemariam Desalgn, envisions additional leverage on
the warring parties though enhanced international participation and
cooperation, bolstering the negotiation efforts of the current IGAD
leadership. This includes participation by the African Union, which has
selected five African heads of state for this purpose, the Troika
(United States, United Kingdom, and Norway), the U.N., the EU, and
China.
IGAD leadership has worked tirelessly to broker a comprehensive
peace agreement. While the two sides have moved closer to a deal in
recent months, neither has agreed to peace. A reformed and
reinvigorated ``IGAD Plus'' process would unite a number of
stakeholders and members of the international community behind a common
peace plan and give international partners a larger role in shaping
process and substance. Ultimately, however, the decision to end this
needless conflict and to begin the process of reform and rebuilding of
South Sudan lies with the warring parties. The United States will
continue to look for further opportunities to enhance the mediation
process and will lead international efforts to bring additional
pressure upon the parties to shift their concern toward the people of
South Sudan, instead of their narrow political interests.
__________
Responses of Cassandra Q. Butts, Nominated to be Ambassador to the
Commonwealth of the Bahamas, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate butt's responses
to questions from senator menendez
Question. What are the most important actions you have taken in
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What is the
impact of your actions? Why were your actions significant?
Answer. At every stage of my adult life I am proud to have worked
to advance the cause of human rights at home and abroad. As a college
student, I was one of the organizers of an advocacy campaign to end the
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's investments in
corporations that did business in apartheid South Africa. Our campaign
was successful, and the effort foreshadowed a path to the end of the
apartheid regime in South Africa and the direction of my professional
life.
My first job following law school was a fellowship with the
Georgetown Women's Law and Public Policy Program, where I worked as a
lawyer to advance access to quality health care for the poorest
communities at the National Health Law Program. My focus included
addressing the particular challenges facing impoverished women of
color, including the incarcerated. Our work advanced efforts to expand
treatment for women of color with HIV/AIDS and to eliminate the
practice of shackling incarcerated women while giving birth.
As a lawyer on Capitol Hill, I worked on civil rights issues and
issues related to migration, asylum, and refugees. In the latter
category, I traveled the world to view conditions for migrants, asylum
seekers, and refugees in conflict and post-conflict zones working with
the Department of State, the United Nations High Commissioner for
Refugees, and a range of international NGOs to find durable solutions
for some of the most vulnerable populations in the world. Through that
work, we were able to provide critical oversight and increase the
number of individuals accepted into the U.S. refugee resettlement
program.
My work at Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) over the past 4
years has focused on advancing the values of democracy and human
rights. As the chairperson of MCC's Investment Management Committee, I
have overseen and approved investments of over $8 billion with partner
countries that must prove a measured commitment to policy performance
in the area of democratic governance and human rights. In my role, I
have traveled to partner countries to the importance democratic
governance and human rights to the work of poverty reduction through
economic growth. In addition, my work at MCC has focused on advancing
the agency's work on gender equality, ensuring that women and men are
equal beneficiaries of our program is an international model for how to
best integrate gender equality in development assistance.
Finally, as a lawyer at the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, the Nation's
premier civil rights legal advocacy organization, I litigated civil
rights cases on issues of voting rights and education. In addition, I
advocated on Capitol Hill and within the executive branch for the
expansion of a range of basic human rights for women and minority
communities.
Question. What are the most pressing human rights issues in the
Bahamas? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in the Bahamas? What
do you hope to accomplish through these actions?
Answer. The Bahamas has a strong tradition of protecting human
rights. Bahamians enjoy freedoms of speech and religion, and Bahamian
media is able to present the various sides of issues and frequently
takes editorial positions critical of the government.
The most pressing human rights concerns in the Bahamas center
around the country's correctional and immigration detention facilities.
Both are outdated, overcrowded, and do not meet the growing needs of
the country. Local human rights organizations report of migration raids
that ignore the rights of those they detain. The United States has
provided training and technical assistance over the last 2 years under
the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI), which has improved
conditions at the Bahamas Department of Correction's (BDOC) and
enhanced BDOC's capacity to operate a sanitary, safe, and secure
correctional facility in conformity with international standards.
If confirmed, I will urge the government to take the steps
necessary to improve conditions of detention and detention practices,
both in terms of addressing immediate problems and in looking more
systematically at modernizing and improving conditions over the medium
to long term. I will also continue to apply U.S. assistance in these
efforts where appropriate with the goal of bringing Bahamian facilities
and procedures into full conformity with international human rights
standards, practices, and procedures.
Statelessness remains an issue, particularly in the case of second
generation Haitian children born in the Bahamas who have access to
neither Haitian nor Bahamian citizenship at birth. I commend the
Bahamian Government for proposing a constitutional amendment allowing
for Bahamian citizen women married to non-Bahamian husbands to pass on
their Bahamian nationality to their children. Statelessness is also a
concern for migrant children born in the Bahamas who, according to the
constitution, have the right to apply for Bahamian citizenship at age
18. The process to acquire citizenship is cumbersome and complex, and
if confirmed, I will urge the government to both simplify the process
and pass the constitutional amendment on gender equality before the end
of 2015.
Question. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
previous response? What challenges will you face in the Bahamas in
advancing human rights and democracy in general?
Answer. Although considered a ``high income'' country by the World
Bank, the Bahamas faces significant resource constraints which make
building new detention centers or expanding existing facilities
challenging. In addition to resource problems, the country also faces
significant challenges in its judicial system. Despite some recent
improvements, criminal cases can be prolonged, and a lengthy appeals
process often adds additional time after a trial before a case is
finalized.
Societal and structural issues present the largest challenges to
advancing human rights and democracy in general. The Bahamian
Constitution protects against discrimination due to race, but societal
prejudices exist, especially with regard to the Haitian immigrant
community. The Bahamian Constitution and law currently do not prohibit
discrimination based on gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity,
and certain gender inequalities exist with regard to citizenship. The
Christie administration has introduced constitutional amendments that
would largely correct these deficiencies, but the process has stalled.
If confirmed, I will continue to advocate for improvements to the
justice sector and promote nondiscrimination and nonviolence toward
vulnerable groups.
Question. Are you committed to meeting with human rights and other
nongovernmental organizations in the United States and with local human
rights NGOs in the Bahamas?
Answer. If confirmed, I will maintain a regular dialogue on human
rights with all stakeholders, including human rights and other NGOs in
the United States and local human rights NGOs in the Bahamas. In
addition, if confirmed, I will engage in a frank dialogue with Bahamian
officials on human rights issues, which will include bringing specific
concerns to the attention of the government when it is appropriate to
do so.
Question. If confirmed, please describe steps that you will take to
enhance effective implementation of Section 620M of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known as the Leahy amendment, within
the Embassy in the Bahamas as well as steps you would take to
accomplish the goal of the law, namely, helping the Government of the
Bahamas end impunity for human rights violations by security forces.
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue Embassy Nassau's current
practice of ensuring that all Bahamian candidates for U.S. assistance
are fully vetted in conformity with State Department and Defense
Department procedures before any assistance is provided. I will ensure
that the Embassy is diligent in denying assistance to Bahamian security
force units when we have credible information that such units have
committed gross violations of human rights. I will also press the
Bahamian Government to establish an appropriate and transparent process
to investigate allegations that government officials have engaged in
human rights violations and to hold accountable those found to have
done so.
__________
ambassador-designate butts's responses
to questions from senator flake
Question. What do you see as the most significant challenges in
relations with the Bahamas? What would be your priorities if confirmed
as Ambassador?
Answer. The United States and the Bahamas enjoy a long-standing
cooperative relationship and security partnership. As one of our
closest neighbors, our shared interests include improving citizen
security and promoting shared prosperity through trade.
If confirmed, I hope to continue working with the government of the
Bahamas on efforts to strengthen citizen security, promote social and
economic development, including advancing U.S. trade and investment
interests, and reduce crime, including illicit trafficking and other
transnational crime. If confirmed, I will encourage the Bahamas to take
a more systemic approach to address the worsening crime situation. I
hope to support efforts by the Bahamas to improve the education system
and look at opportunities for workforce development. Other key
priorities will be economic development and growth, including the
attendant energy and environmental issues. Finally, I will ensure that
the entire U.S. mission in the Bahamas--Bahamians and Americans--
understands that their contributions are valued and that they are
appreciated.
Question. The Bahamian economy was hard hit by the global financial
crisis and has only registered meager economic growth rates over the
past 3 years. What is the outlook for the Bahamian economy over the
next few years? Is there any prospect that the Bahamas will diversify
its economy beyond tourism and financial services?
Answer. The Bahamas economy is projected to see real growth rise
steadily to 2.8 percent by 2016 based on IMF forecasts. The government
anticipates additional revenue from the new value-added tax that became
effective on January 1, 2015, and the licensing and regulation of local
gaming operations later in 2015. The Bahamas also expects economic
boost from continued economic improvement in the United States, which
is the Bahamas' largest trading partner and source of tourism dollars.
The Bahamian Government faces significant challenges in
diversifying its economy beyond tourism and financial services in the
near future. New investments in the light manufacturing and technology
sectors are hindered by high energy prices and limited availability of
skilled labor. The government continues to promote investment in
nontraditional sectors outside of tourism and financial services, and
is also making efforts to promote the agriculture sector in an effort
to mitigate the high cost of importing food. The government also has
announced plans to offer new products within the financial services
sector, such as the development of an international arbitration center
and an offshore clearing and settlement center for international
currencies, in the hopes of attracting greater trade and investment to
the country.
Question. U.S.-Bahamian cooperation on drug interdiction has been
strong. Are there any further actions that the Bahamian Government can
undertake to improve its antidrug efforts?
Answer. The United States and the Bahamas enjoy a long-standing
history of counternarcotics cooperation, most notably under the Drug
Enforcement Administration (DEA) led Operation Bahamas, Turks and
Caicos (OPBAT). Under OPBAT, DEA Special Agents coordinate, in an
integrated manner, with the Royal Bahamas Police Force (RBPF) and the
Royal Bahamas Defense Force (RBDF) to gather intelligence, conduct
investigations, and execute interdictions. OPBAT seizure operations
increased substantially between FY 2012 and FY 2014. We believe this is
due, in part, to increased U.S. support, cooperation, and equipment.
The Bahamian Government could impose stricter penalties on
individuals convicted of serious drug offenses. In addition, the
Bahamas continues to be challenged by delays in trials and in
responding to U.S. extradition requests. Improved procedures to
expedite extraditions would bring drug crime offenders more quickly to
trial and serve as a more credible deterrent for traffickers. The
Bahamas National Anti-Drug Strategy places significant emphasis on drug
abuse, awareness, demand reduction, and treatment policies, but
programs in these fields would benefit from additional resources. In
addition, health care professionals report that women and residents of
the Family Islands (i.e., islands other than New Providence) are
underrepresented in substance abuse prevention and treatment programs.
__________
Responses of Katherine S. Dhanani, Nominated to be Ambassador to the
Federal Republic of Somalia, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate dhanani's responses
to questions from senator corker
Question. What considerations, apart from the holding of elections,
were taken into account when recognizing Somalia as a sovereign state
in 2012? What additional considerations have been identified as crucial
in moving to the nomination of an ambassador?
Answer. U.S. recognition of the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS)
on January 17, 2013, was the first step toward normalizing the U.S.-
Somalia bilateral relationship. The decision was in large part due to
the relatively credible political transition after more than a decade
of transitional governments. The provisional constitution and
Parliament forged from the 2012 transition were the first steps toward
rebuilding a sovereign Somali state. Recognizing the FGS signaled U.S.
commitment to sustained diplomatic engagement with Somalia.
The Department's decision to seek a Presidential Appointment of an
ambassador was in recognition of the growing interagency engagement
toward Somalia. Between FY 2006 and FY 2014, State and USAID provided
nearly $3.1 billion in development, security, education, and
humanitarian assistance. The level of U.S. assistance underscored the
need to coordinate our Somalia engagement under an ambassador, to
ensure that our relationship with the FGS best reflects our broad range
of national security and foreign policy interests.
Question. What specific parameters, including political
reconciliation and security concerns, will be required by the United
States to warrant a move of the Office of Somali Affairs/U.S. Embassy
for Somalia in Nairobi, from its current location to Somalia? What is
the best estimate or U.S. expectation of a move of our mission to
Somalia? Would it be to Mogadishu in every instance or is there an
intermediate location elsewhere?
Answer. The Department of State does not have permanent diplomatic
presence in Somalia due to continued instability and the high-threat
environment in Mogadishu. After the December 25, 2014, al-Shabaab
attack on the Mogadishu International Airport (MIA) compound, the
Department is assessing what security upgrades need to be made to
bolster MIA perimeter security and the internal compound utilized by
U.S. diplomats. As security conditions permit, we look forward to
broadening and deepening our engagement, and to reestablishing a
permanent diplomatic presence in Mogadishu. As I mentioned in my
testimony, there is no fixed timeline for the establishment of a
permanent diplomatic presence in Mogadishu, but if confirmed, I will
carefully monitor the security environment in Somalia and make the
recommendation for a more enduring U.S. presence in Mogadishu, when the
environment permits.
Question. How do the positions of U.S. Special Representative for
Somalia and Ambassador to Somalia differ, if at all? Will the role of a
U.S. Special Representative be necessary upon the confirmation of an
ambassador, and if so, what role will the SE play?
Answer. The U.S. Special Representative for Somalia (SRS) is a
secretarial appointee who manages the Department's relationship with
the Federal Government of Somalia. The SRS, resident in Nairobi, also
engages regional governments on Somalia--Burundi, Djibouti, Ethiopia,
Kenya, and Uganda--given their national security interests in Somalia
as troop contributing countries. The SRS does not have authority to
direct and coordinate the actions of U.S. executive branch agencies in
Somalia. As chief of mission, unless otherwise directed by the
President, the U.S. Ambassador to Somalia will have full responsibility
and authority for the direction, coordination, and supervision of all
U.S. Government executive branch activities, operations, and employees
in Somalia. The role of SRS will no longer be needed as the U.S.
Ambassador to Somalia will maintain the regional coordination role
given the level of international engagement in Somalia.
Question. Yemen may prove a cautionary tale. In view of the
unsuccessful efforts of significant U.S. military assistance and
operational emphasis in Yemen to withstand political and militant
unrest and in view of the ensuing instability, how will U.S. policy
integration and coherence across USG agencies address current parallel
efforts similar to those that existed in Yemen? What specific mechanism
exists to harmonize U.S. policy governmentwide in moving Somalia toward
sustainable governance and greater stability than it has had in
decades? How will the U.S. role in partner efforts to help reestablish
a viable government for Somalia change with an ambassador?
Answer. U.S. policy in Somalia directly links security sector
reform to political progress. Our Somalia strategy, previously shared
with Congress, includes ways in which political development and
security progress must move in tandem. U.S. policy is harmonized
governmentwide through the White House directed interagency policy
coordination process, and with our international partners via the New
Deal Somali Compact.
The United States and international partners support a regional
force, the African Union Mission to Somalia (AMISOM), that enjoys broad
international and regional support. AMISOM is composed of African troop
contributors that have a strategic interest in stabilizing Somalia and
as a result have initiated a number of military operations designed to
pressure and erode al-Shabaab. AMISOM also has provided critical time
and political space so the Somali political process can gain strength
and the Federal Government of Somalia can begin to build a
representative, apolitical, human rights respecting, professionally
trained force under civilian oversight.
In Yemen, there was no international or regional force like AMISOM
that provided Yemen's leaders the time and space to find a peaceful
solution to Yemen's political crisis, while at the same time
maintaining security and putting pressure on al-Qaeda in the Arabian
Peninsula.
Question. What is the status of Somaliland and Puntland as it
relates to U.S. policy? How do you expect the status to change, if at
all, in the near to mid-term? What are your priorities for working with
Somaliland and how will this translate into engaging Somalia?
Answer. The United States recognizes a single Somalia, which
includes Somaliland and Puntland. We are encouraged by the progress
made in the integration of Puntland into the federal state formation
process. While progress has stalled in regards to the formal, Turkey-
sponsored talks between Somaliland authorities and the Federal
Government of Somalia (FGS), we continue to encourage dialogue between
both parties.
The United States regularly engages with all levels of the Somali
Government, including the FGS, the newly established interim regional
administrations, and the authorities in Puntland and Somaliland. If
confirmed, my priorities at the regional level will be to promote
security, good governance, and economic development, as well as to
advance the state formation process.
Question. The implementation of Vision 2016 is behind schedule. How
will you apply pressure on the Somalia Government to complete the plan?
Answer. While implementation of Vision 2016 is behind schedule, the
Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) has made significant and important
progress, especially in regards to advancing the state formation
process. That said, time is short and the FGS has itself acknowledged
that Vision 2016 is behind schedule.
If confirmed, I will engage extensively with the President, Prime
Minister, parliamentarians, and the regional governments, in close
collaboration with our international partners, to push for a renewed
focus on accelerating implementation of
the Vision 2016 reform agenda. It is of paramount importance that the
FGS move swiftly this year to lay the foundations for credible,
democratic, and inclusive national elections in 2016, as well as for a
constitutional referendum as envisioned by Vision 2016. The United
States will maintain close engagement with the international community
to ensure we have a coordinated approach to support the Somalis as they
work towards 2016.
Question. How will East Africa region's instability and the
drawdown of Embassy personnel in Nairobi, Kenya, affect the movement
and accessibility of the U.S. Ambassador to Somalia to travel and
conduct business with the Government of Somalia, its citizenry and U.S.
programming in Somalia while operating from Nairobi?
Answer. The Somalia Unit, comprised of 21 personnel, was deemed to
be of such strategic importance it was not reduced in size during the
July 2014 drawdown of Embassy personnel in Nairobi, Kenya. The drawdown
did not reduce staffing or programming operations of the Somalia Unit.
If I am confirmed, the Department will transition the Somalia Unit to
U.S. Mission Somalia and is in the process of determining the
accompanying staffing footprint. As security conditions permit, U.S.
officials will maintain regular travel into Somalia to conduct official
business and promote our foreign policy objectives.
______
ambassador-designate dhanani's responses to
questions from senator menendez
Question. What are the most important actions you have taken in
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What is the
impact of your actions? Why were your actions significant?
Answer. Throughout my career, I have advanced U.S. interests in the
promotion of human rights. In my current assignment in the Africa
Bureau, I lead the office responsible for coordinating the Bureau's
efforts to promote human rights throughout the continent. Our
activities include, for example, ensuring that recipients of security
assistance have clean human rights records; promoting atrocity
prevention; promoting fair, credible, and peaceful elections; and
defending the human rights of LGBT persons. We coordinate the Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices, Trafficking in Persons Reports, and
International Religious Freedom Reports for African countries. As
consul general in Hyderabad, India, my team's activities included
partnering with the private sector to sponsor training for disabled
adults, promoting local nongovernmental organizations' projects to
economically empower women in lower income Muslim communities,
supporting efforts to combat HIV/AIDS stigma, and persuading local
police to rescind an order banning a rainbow film festival. In Gabon
our human-rights-related activities included a public program
highlighting abuses committed as part of rituals to enhance political
success and in Zambia we were particularly active in responding to the
humanitarian needs of refugees, including projects aimed at protecting
teenage refugee girls from sexual abuse and exploitation.
My actions to promote human rights were particularly important
during my service as deputy chief of mission in Zimbabwe. The U.S.
Embassy's programs directly assisted thousands of Zimbabweans whose
human rights were abused by the regime, and our efforts to expose abuse
changed the course of events surrounding the 2008 election. When U.S.
Government-supported election monitoring made stealing the election
impossible during a first round of voting, the Government of Zimbabwe
launched a campaign of violence and intimidation to ensure that the
ruling party would prevail during a runoff. The U.S. mission in
Zimbabwe already supported a network of partners to provide medical
care, psychological counseling, and legal counsel to victims of torture
and other human rights abuses. When the scale and severity of abuse
expanded dramatically, we led an international effort to protect
victims and expose abusers. In addition to supporting shelters and
services for internally displaced persons (IDPs), we interviewed scores
of individuals who had been beaten and burned out of their homes to
identify individuals at risk of further political persecution for
targeted support. The Embassy led the diplomatic community in visits to
torture camps, defying police roadblocks. On July 3, 2008, hundreds of
IDPs who had been forced to leave a shelter arrived at the U.S. Embassy
seeking refuge. We scrambled to identify alternative shelters for the
women and children, and provided blankets and hot meals for over 150
men that winter night. The USAID Director and I spent July 4
identifying and setting up a shelter on a farm outside the city, where
we identified partners able to meet the IDPs' basic needs in the
ensuing weeks. Independent media and watchdog groups who enjoyed our
support provided us with documentation of the regime's abuses which we
shared throughout the region, convincing Zimbabwe's neighbors that this
time they could not turn a blind eye to the Mugabe regime's crimes. As
a result, the ruling party recognized that it would be unable to steal
the runoff, and invited the opposition into a coalition.
I was proud to lead the team at U.S. Embassy Harare who
demonstrated the tremendous compassion and empathy of the American
people under the most trying circumstances, making a difference in both
the lives of individual Zimbabweans and the course of public events.
Question. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
Somalia? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Somalia? What do
you hope to accomplish through these actions?
Answer. If I am confirmed, working with the African Union,
Government of Somalia, and Somali civil society to improve protection
of civilians will be central to my engagement. Violence against women
and girls, including rape, remains a pervasive problem. I will work
with Somali and international counterparts including AMISOM to improve
protection efforts, including ensuring that women can access the
services they need and perpetrators are held accountable. I am also
deeply concerned about the situation of media freedom in Somalia. The
country remains one of the most dangerous places to be a journalist. I
will regularly discuss protection concerns with Somali journalists
themselves, speak out against abuses against journalists, and strongly
encourage the Somali Government to fully respect freedom of expression.
In addition, I will work with Somalia and the United Nations to further
implementation of Somalia's action plan to end the use and recruitment
of child soldiers and standardize operating procedures for the
reception and handover of children separated from armed groups.
Question. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
previous response? What challenges will you face in Somalia in
advancing human rights and democracy in general?
Answer. Key challenges to addressing human rights concerns in the
country include continued insecurity in al-Shabaab-controlled portions
of the country. This limits not only U.S. Government access to much of
the country, but also access by international and local partners who
could provide information that is vital to addressing human rights
concerns. Human rights organizations have identified the lack of data
on the situation in much of the country as problematic.
Improving civilian protection while conflict continues is extremely
challenging, but it will be central to my efforts. Attacks, including
direct attacks on civilians, continue to result in deaths, injuries,
and displacement. Somali women and girls experience systematic
marginalization, which makes it difficult to address gender-based
violence and sexual exploitation. Women are reluctant to report abuse
due to possible reprisals, and police are reluctant to investigate. The
Government has arrested alleged rape victims. Authorities rarely used
formal procedures to address rape. Improving protection for journalists
is challenging in part due to the continued insecurity and presence of
al-Shabaab. Also challenging is that the Government of Somalia and
regional authorities continue to arrest, detain, and prosecute
journalists. In regards to child soldiers, the government has taken
additional steps to implement its action plan with the U.N., though,
overall, implementation of the plan has been limited. More also needs
to be done to improve demobilization, rehabilitation, and reintegration
efforts for children separated from armed groups.
Question. Are you committed to meeting with human rights and other
nongovernmental organizations in the United States and with local human
rights NGOs in Somalia?
Answer. If confirmed, one of my most important goals as U.S.
Ambassador to Somalia will be improving respect for human rights in the
country, so that all Somalis have the opportunity to exercise their
fundamental freedoms and live their lives without fear. My efforts will
include those focused on improving civilian protection, strengthening
efforts to address rape, building respect for media freedom, and
ensuring that children are not used as soldiers. Human rights and other
NGOs are critical to this work and I look forward to meeting with them,
if I am confirmed.
Question. If confirmed, please describe steps that you will take to
enhance effective implementation of Section 620M of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known as the Leahy amendment, within
the Embassy as well as steps you would take to accomplish the goal of
the law, namely, helping the Government of Somalia end impunity for
human rights violations by security forces.
Answer. The Leahy laws are based on a basic principle: A government
security apparatus' respect for human rights bolsters its legitimacy
and trustworthiness in the eyes of the people it is supposed to
protect, and enhances its ability to protect. Moreover, holding
violators accountable fortifies the rule of law, which will be key in
our efforts to improve governance in Somalia. If confirmed, the Embassy
staff and I will convey this message in all our interactions with the
FGS. In terms of implementation, the Embassy and the Department vet all
individuals and units of the security services; if confirmed, I will
ensure that our vetting continues to be comprehensive, thorough, and in
full compliance with the Leahy laws, and that those who violate human
rights are restricted from training. Furthermore, I will strongly urge
the FGS to hold all violators accountable for their actions.
Question. In your written testimony, you mention the importance of
building Somali institutional capacity. The U.S. Government has spent
considerable time and resources in training the Somali national army as
part of its Somalia strategy. The U.S strategy toward sub-Saharan
Africa states that as part of security sector reform, the United States
will build security forces that ``are subordinate to and operating
jointly with their constitutional civil authorities.''
a. What programs are currently underway to build up the
civil authorities in Somalia? What is the status of current
efforts to build the capacity of the Somali Ministry of
Defense? What plans do we have to build capacity in the
judiciary and civilian oversight organizations that can provide
oversight of the Somali National Army?
Answer. The United States has supported the development of the
Ministry of Defense (MOD) by refurbishing the MOD headquarters at
Gashandiga in Mogadishu, as well as providing a contract advisor who
works with the Defense Minister at the MOD on a daily basis. Other
donors are also participating in the effort to build the capacity of
the MOD, including the European Union. We intend to expand our support
to the MOD in the coming years, to include additional training,
advisory support, and material support. Our assistance will reflect the
absorptive capacity of the MOD, and complement the efforts of other
donors. We are designing this support in coordination with other donors
to strengthen civilian oversight of the military sothat respect for
human rights and inclusivity become well entrenched.
b. What tools were used to assess the requirements of the
Somali National Army and what is the plan for monitoring and
evaluating our current efforts in keeping with the policy
guidelines contained in Presidential Policy Directive 23?
Answer. Defining the requirements of the Somali National Army (SNA)
has been an iterative process involving inputs and analysis from across
the U.S. interagency, the AU Mission to Somalia (AMISOM), other donors
involved in the effort to develop the SNA, U.S.-funded advisors
embedded with the SNA and MOD, and, most importantly, the Somalis
themselves. Program monitors in Mogadishu, augmented by U.S. Government
personnel's visits, ensure programming is being provided in line with
U.S. Government regulations and objectives.
c. How is the United States coordinating with other donors
in the security sector?
Answer. U.S. support to the Somali security services is coordinated
by regular working group meetings within the framework of the New
Deal's Peacebuilding and Statebuilding Group Two (PSG-2). PSG-2 and the
subworking groups that fall under it, is the primary vehicle for
coordinating international community support directly with the Federal
Government of Somalia, the U.N., the AU, and other partners.
d. What is the administration doing to build government
capacity to administer or provide social services in Mogadishu
and areas which have been liberated from al-Shabaab?
Answer. The United States is helping the Federal Government of
Somalia (FGS) define, coordinate, and manage the frameworks for
national programs within the Office of the President, National Security
Advisor, and the Ministry of Interior and Federalism. We support the
Federal Government of Somalia to increase inclusiveness of political
processes and facilitate the delivery of critical services in newly
liberated areas, including training national and regional Parliaments
to increase their oversight role through the Transition Initiatives for
Stabilization from USAID. The United States helped the FGS understand
the utility of initiating local-level reconciliation and civic
dialogues in areas liberated from al-Shabaab, as a means to prevent new
conflicts from erupting in the aftermath of liberation.
In FY 2014, the administration provided more than $58.3 million in
development assistance to Somalia to promote peace and stability,
foster good governance, spur economic growth and job creation, improve
transparency and accountability, support institutional development, and
increase the responsiveness of government institutions at the federal,
regional, and local levels. The United States is supporting Somalia's
Ministry of Education to help develop an Education Sector Strategic
Plan. Development of this national plan will build government capacity
to deliver improvements in educational quality and services across the
country.
Question. Regarding the Somali Federal Government's Vision 2016
agenda, you mentioned that many deadlines have already been missed and
that the international community continues to encourage the federal
government to adhere to the roadmap.
a. What is the status of constitutional development in
Somalia?
Answer. The Somali parliamentary constitutional review committee
has begun to advise the recently established Independent Constitutional
Review Implementation Commission (IRIC), on chapters one and four of
the constitution which address the critical issues of the status of
Mogadishu in the state formation process and the electoral law. The
Speaker of Parliament informed us that he intends to expedite the
review process during the next session of Parliament (technically
scheduled to open the week of April 20).
b. What is the status of discussions about federalism and
the integration of semiautonomous regions such as Somaliland?
Answer. The state formation process to build a federal system in
Somalia is currently underway. Interim administrations, precursors to
formal federal states, are now in place in Jubbaland and the South West
region, and a reconciliation process is currently underway in the
central regions. The Federal Government of Somalia and Puntland signed
an agreement in October 2014 to pave the way for Puntland's recognition
as a federal member state. To accelerate the federalism process,
Mogadishu and the regional leaders recently created the Somali
Leadership Forum to discuss key issues, including regional security
force integration, 2016 elections, and the state formation process.
Somaliland maintains its unilaterally declared independence from
Mogadishu, but has engaged in Turkish-sponsored talks on issues
requiring cooperation, such as airspace management.
__________
ambassador-designate dhanani's responses
to questions from senator flake
Question. What are the prospects for Somalia to hold elections as
expected in 2016? Given the political infighting and insecurity, will
it be possible to hold a nationwide constitutional referendum and
elections next year?
Answer. The United States continues to support the Federal
Government of Somalia's Vision 2016 agenda, which includes holding
national elections in 2016. The Federal Government of Somalia (FGS)
itself has acknowledged that Vision 2016 is behind schedule. We
consistently urge the FGS to accelerate the pace of reform and to put
in place the institutions, laws, and processes necessary to meet its
Vision 2016 goals.
Question. Given that the current central government was largely
appointed and selected to overcome internal rivalries, do you think
these elections will be viewed as credible and legitimate in the eyes
of the Somali people?
Answer. The United States supports Somalia's state formation
process, currently underway, which will lay the foundation for a more
representative government. We continue to urge the Somali Government to
begin the process to review the interim constitution and present a
final version for its citizens to approve in a national referendum by
early 2016. USAID's democracy and governance program in Somalia
strengthens regional and national parliaments to perform oversight and
to develop legislation, particularly as regards the legal framework
necessary for credible and legitimate referenda and electoral
processes. If confirmed, I will continue to press the Government of
Somalia urgently to take steps toward inclusive and democratic
elections. As Somalia continues to develop inclusive political
institutions, its leaders must support the ability of citizens to
choose their own government through periodic free and fair elections.
Question. How would you characterize al-Shabaab's relationship with
al-Qaeda, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, and the Islamic State,
respectively?
Answer. Al-Shabaab publicly announced its merger with al-Qaeda in a
February 2012 statement in which they pledged loyalty to al-Qaeda
leader Ayman al-Zawahiri. Al-Shabaab is not related to ISIS, although
there have been reports of ethnic Somalis, not affiliated with al-
Shabaab, fighting alongside extremist groups in Syria and Iraq. Al
Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, like al-Shabaab, is an al-Qaeda
affiliate.
Question. What is the anticipated timeline for establishing an
embassy in Mogadishu? What are the challenges with the current system,
in which U.S. diplomats and USAID personnel travel back and forth from
Kenya?
Answer. We look forward to broadening and deepening our engagement
and to reestablishing a permanent diplomatic presence in Mogadishu.
Currently, chief of mission personnel travel to Mogadishu and other
locations in Somalia as security conditions permit. Establishment of a
permanent diplomatic presence in Mogadishu will represent the
culmination of this recognition process, but there is no fixed timeline
for achieving this objective.
Question. The State Department budget justification includes a
request for $110 million to support African Peacekeeping Rapid Response
Partnership (APRRP). According to the CBJ, the program would ``build
rapid peacekeeping response capabilities in Ethiopia, Ghana, Rwanda,
Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda.''
(a). How does this proposal compare to existing training
programs, including African Contingency Operations Training and
Assistance (ACOTA) Program?
Answer. APRRP assistance will complement but not replace existing
peace operations capacity-building programs, such as the Global Peace
Operations Initiative (GPOI), the Africa Contingency Operations
Training and Assistance (ACOTA) program (which is funded predominantly
through GPOI), and the International Police Peacekeeping Operations
Support (IPPOS) program. GPOI and IPPOS emphasize broader, global
capacity-building efforts focused on addressing a wider range of
international peace operations shortfalls and strengthening the
effectiveness of U.N. and regional missions. APPRP partners have and
may continue to receive training through these other programs as well.
(b). How would you see the program impacting troop
contributing countries effectiveness in ongoing operations?
Answer. APRRP will focus on developing the capabilities of partner
nations to deploy forces rapidly in support of an AU or U.N.-mandated
operation. APRRP will inject targeted resources to address specific
gaps in peacekeeping rapid response capabilities in the selected
partner countries. With this specific goal in mind, APRRP works with a
set of proven partners to emphasize training and provision and
maintenance of equipment to enable rapid deployment and sustainment.
While facilitating rapid deployment is the primary focus of the
program, we anticipate that the improved specialty capabilities and
institutional capacity provided through APRRP have the potential to
benefit ongoing operations as well.
(c). As you know, reports implicated Ugandan and Burundian
troops participating in AMISOM of raping civilians. Would APPRP
include modules aimed at protecting civilians? Would, if not
how, do you guard against reputational risk to the U.S. from
being associated with their training?
Answer. We are greatly concerned about the reports of sexual
exploitation and abuse by AMISOM forces. The United States immediately
engaged with the African Union and the Governments of Uganda and
Burundi to urge them to undertake a credible and transparent
investigation into the alleged incidents immediately. Ugandan and
Burundian forces deploying to AMISOM currently receive substantial
training related to human rights and protection of civilians through
the Africa Contingency Operations Training and Assistance (ACOTA)
program and counterterrorism training funded through section 2282. We
are continuously looking at ways to improve this training, including in
response to the reports of sexual exploitation and abuse. That training
will need to focus not only on increased awareness of sexual
exploitation and abuse, but also on improving the capacity of the
contingents to investigate allegations and hold perpetrators
accountable.
We intend to keep APRRP focused on developing specialized
capabilities and enabling units required to facilitate rapid deployment
(including logistics, engineering, equipment maintenance, transport,
intelligence, and medical capabilities), and, therefore, we do not
expect protection of civilians to be a primary focus of the APRRP-
funded training events. This is not because protection of civilians is
unimportant, but rather because these topics are already being
addressed through the existing predeployment training initiatives
funded through the Global Peace Operations Initiative (like ACOTA) and
section 2282. We intend APRRP to complement, not replace existing
training initiatives.
__________
NOMINATIONS
----------
TUESDAY, MAY 19, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Mileydi Guilarte, of the District of Columbia, to be United
States Alternate Executive Director of the Inter-
American Development Bank
Jennifer Ann Haverkamp, of Indiana, to be Assistant Secretary
of State for Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs
Marcia Denise Occomy, of the District of Columbia, to be United
States Director of the African Development Bank for a
term of five years
Sunil Sabharwal, of California, to be United States Alternate
Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund
for a term of two years
Brian James Egan, of Maryland, to be Legal Adviser of the
Department of State
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:45 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John
Barrasso, presiding.
Present: Senators Barrasso, Corker, Gardner, Udall, Cardin,
Murphy, and Markey.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WYOMING
Senator Barrasso. Well, good afternoon. Congratulations. I
would like to call to order this hearing of the United States
Senate Committee on Foreign Relations.
The committee is meeting today to examine the nomination of
five individuals to serve our country's interests in
international financial institutions in the State Department.
Again, congratulations on your nominations to these
important positions. I want to welcome all of you and extend a
warm welcome, on behalf of the committee, to all your families
and friends who are here. And I hope that, when you get a
chance to testify, each of you will introduce others that are
here supporting you from your family.
Should you serve our Nation in these important positions,
it is critical that each of you provide strong stewardship of
American taxpayer resources, demonstrate professionalism and
good judgment, and vigorously work to advance the priorities of
the United States.
During your testimony, I hope each of you will lay out your
vision and goals for the positions to which you have been
nominated for, and your plan to achieve them.
Joining us this afternoon are five nominees. I am pleased
to introduce them to the committee.
Mileydi Guilarte, who is been nominated to be the United
States Alternate Executive Director of the Inter-American
Development Bank. And she is currently serving as the
International Cooperation Specialist in the Bureau for Latin
America and the Caribbean at the United States Agency of
International Development. She previously worked at the United
Nations, the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund.
Jennifer Haverkamp is the nominee to be Assistant Secretary
of State for Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs. Ms. Haverkamp is currently an independent
consultant and lecturer at George Washington University Law
School. She has previously worked for the Environmental Defense
Fund, serving as the Director of International Climate Program
and the Managing Director for International Policy.
Marcia Occomy is the nominee to the be United States
Director of the African Development Bank for a term of 5 years.
She is currently a specialist leader at Deloitte Consulting and
has been with Deloitte since 2009, where she has worked with
the United States Agency for International Development on
various assignments.
Sunil Sabharwal is the nominee to be the United States
Alternate Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund
for a term of 2 years. He is an independent investor and
consultant in the international payment sector since 2006.
During his career, he has worked at the European Bank for
Reconstruction and Development, and held senior positions at
First Data Corporation, Western Union, and GE Capital.
And then Brian Egan has been nominated for the position of
Legal Adviser at the Department of State. He is currently
working as Legal Adviser to the National Security Council,
Deputy Assistant to the President, and Deputy Counsel to the
President. In addition to previously working with the national
security staff at the White House, he has also served as an
attorney adviser at the Office of Legal Adviser of the
Department of State.
Now I want to turn to the Ranking Member, Senator Udall, to
offer his opening remarks.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Chairman Barrasso, for
holding this hearing. And I, too, want to welcome our nominees
who are with us this afternoon. We have five well-qualified
candidates with impressive resumes being considered today.
As most of you know, our subcommittee's jurisdiction covers
a lot of ground, some would say from the ocean floor out to
space. The Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs, I think, would agree with that. Their work,
ranging from environmental issues, such as climate change, to
emerging issues, such as space, is crucial to our foreign
policy. Congress has a vital interest in international
institutions to promote economic growth, to support the
development of international law, to support strong
environmental standards and improve security and lives. All
serve to strengthen social and international development and
further important objectives of U.S. foreign policy.
The nominations we are considering today provide an
excellent opportunity for the United States to continue to work
closely with the international community. Our participation in
the international development organizations help shape the
discussions in multilateral forums to reflect U.S. priorities
and interests, and also ensure that organizations like the
Inter-American Development Bank, the African Development Bank,
and the International Monetary Fund are well equipped to
succeed in their missions. Those missions are essential to
promote security, economic prosperity, and advocate for
healthier lives through science and partnerships. That is a
responsible course and brings greater stability, not only to
specific regions around the world, but throughout the world.
So, I look forward to our discussions here today with this
impressive list of nominees.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I would yield back.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Senator Cardin, anything you would like to add?
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just really want to welcome our nominees, thank you for
your public service, your willingness to serve, and I also
thank your families.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you both.
And all of the positions that the committee is discussing
today are very important. I look forward to hearing the
testimony.
Your full statements will be entered into the record in
their entirety. And I ask that you try to summarize your
testimony in about 5 minutes in order for members to have an
opportunity to ask questions. Other members may be joining us
at different times during the hearing. And again, please feel
free to introduce your family members who are here today
offering their support.
And, with that, Ms. Guilarte, may we please start with you?
STATEMENT OF MILEYDI GUILARTE, NOMINATED TO BE U.S. ALTERNATE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
Ms. Guilarte. Thank you, Chairman.
Chairman Barrasso, Senator Udall, members of the committee,
thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today.
I am honored that President Obama nominated me to serve as
the Alternate Executive Director at the Inter-American
Development Bank. I am also grateful to Secretary Lew and
Assistant Secretary Marisa Lago for supporting me.
I am also grateful to my family, friends, and colleagues
that are present today for their love, encouragement, and
unwavering support. I would like to acknowledge my mother,
Zenaida Guilarte, who is with me today.
If confirmed, I will bring to the IDB a deep understanding
of Latin America, solid experience with international
development, and a strong belief in the value of public
service, and the commitment to relentlessly promote U.S.
interests in the region.
Representing the United States at the IDB, an institution
created to support the economic and social development of Latin
America, is a humbling yet vital undertaking. If confirmed, I
would be the first Latina in nearly 30 years to hold this
important position.
Since I appeared before this distinguished committee a year
ago, I have continued to strengthen my experience and
engagement in Latin America at the United States Agency for
International Development, primarily working on our response to
last summer's surge of unaccompanied minors from Central
America. Addressing the interrelated economic, political, and
security challenges facing the region, and their consequences,
are critical to the national security interests of the United
States. If confirmed, I hope to continue supporting this
difficult and challenging task.
Let me take the opportunity to tell you a little bit about
my background, which has helped shape how I came to pursue a
career in international development.
Born in Cuba, I left Havana for the United States at an
early age with my family in search of a better life with only a
single blue suitcase in our hands. I spent my formative years
in Miami, where I worked side by side with my parents in flea
markets each weekend to help make ends meet. These experiences
taught me the values of discipline and hard work. I was the
first member of my family to graduate from college. And I feel
deeply blessed to have prospered in America.
While in graduate school, I focused on developing a social
academic foundation to understand economic, political, and
social issue as they impact development and democracy. After
graduation, my deep commitment to the promotion of democracy
and human rights led me to work and live in various countries
around the world.
Through these experiences, I deepened my leadership skills
and learned how critical the interaction between financial
institutions, donor, and civil society are in the development
of the world's poorest nations. At the World Bank and at the
United Nations, I worked on conflict prevention, humanitarian
assistance, and strengthening the emerging democracies. Most
recently, at the United States Agency for International
Development, I have worked on our response to address the root
causes of the influx of unaccompanied minors while at the same
time contributed to the interagency process that produced the
administration's proposed $1 billion request for Central
America. These experiences allow me to appreciate the
challenges of working within complex multilateral institutions
and develop the skills to help promote effective initiatives in
that environment.
Thinking about Latin America has been a constant throughout
my life. The opportunity to represent our great country at the
Inter-American Development Bank is a particular honor for me as
an American born in Latin America. If confirmed, I will work
diligently to advance U.S. objectives at the IDB by carefully
stewarding the resources of U.S. taxpayers and by promoting
greater accountability, transparency, and effectiveness.
I look forward to working closely with the members of this
committee and your staff. Thank you for your consideration. And
I look forward to answering any questions you might have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Guilarte follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mileydi Guilarte
Chairman Barrasso, Senator Udall, members of the committee, thank
you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored that
President Obama nominated me to serve as the Alternate Executive
Director at the Inter-American Development Bank. I am also grateful to
Secretary Lew and Assistant Secretary Marisa Lago for supporting me.
I am also grateful to my family, friends, and colleagues [that are
present today], for their love, encouragement, and unwavering support.
I specially would like to thank my mother, Zenaida, for inspiring me to
be better each day.
If confirmed, I will bring to the IDB a deep understanding of Latin
America, solid experience with international development, a strong
belief in the value of public service, and the commitment to
relentlessly promote the U.S. interests in the region.
Representing the United States at the IDB, an institution created
to support the economic and social development of Latin America, is a
humbling yet vital undertaking. If confirmed, I would be the first
Latina in nearly 30 years to hold this important position.
Since I appeared before this distinguished committee a year ago, I
have continued to strengthen my experience and engagement in Latin
America at the United States Agency for International Development,
primarily working on our response to last summer's surge of
unaccompanied minors from Central America. Addressing the interrelated
economic, political and security challenges facing the region and their
consequences, are critical to the national security interests of the
United States. If confirmed, I hope to continue supporting this
difficult and challenging task.
Let me take the opportunity to tell you a little bit about my
background, which has shaped how I came to pursue a career in
international development. Born in Cuba, I left Havana for the United
States at an early age with my family in search of a better life with
only a single blue suitcase in our hands. I spent my formative years in
Miami, where I worked side by side with my parents in flea markets each
weekend to help make ends meet. These experiences taught me the values
of discipline and hard work. I was the first member of my family to
graduate from college, and I feel deeply blessed to have prospered in
America.
While in graduate school, I focused on developing a solid academic
foundation to understand economic, political and social issues as they
impact development and democracy.
After graduation, my deep commitment to the promotion of democracy
and human rights led me to work and live in various countries around
the globe. Professionally, I have worked in countries as diverse as
India, East Timor, the Philippines, and the Republic of the Maldives.
Through these experiences, I deepened my leadership skills and learned
how critical the interaction between financial institutions, donors and
civil society are in the development of the world's poorest nations.
At the World Bank and at the United Nations, I worked on conflict
prevention, humanitarian assistance, and strengthening emerging
democracies. Most recently, at the United States Agency for
International Development, I have worked on our response to address the
root causes of the influx of unaccompanied minors, while at the same
time contributed to the interagency process that produced the
administration's proposed $1 billion request for Central America. These
experiences allowed me to appreciate the challenges of working within
complex multilateral institutions and develop the skills to help
promote effective initiatives in that environment.
Thinking about Latin America has been a constant throughout my
life. The opportunity to represent our great country at the Inter-
American Development Bank is a particular honor for me as an American
born in Latin America.
If confirmed, I will work diligently to advance U.S. objectives at
the Inter-American Development Bank by carefully stewarding the
resources of the U.S. taxpayer and by promoting greater accountability,
transparency and effectiveness. I look forward to working closely with
the members of this committee and your staff.
Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to answering
any questions you might have.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you so very much for your
testimony.
Ms. Guilarte. You are welcome.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ms. Haverkamp.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER ANN HAVERKAMP, NOMINATED
TO BE ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR OCEANS
AND INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL AND SCIENTIFIC
AFFAIRS
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Udall and distinguished members of the committee. It is a great
privilege for me to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee for Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau
of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific
Affairs.
With your permission, I have a longer statement for the
record.
I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry
for placing their trust in me for this position. And I look
forward to again working with Under Secretary Novelli, my
former colleague from the Office of the U.S. Trade
Representative. If confirmed, I very much look forward to
working with the Congress, and with this committee in
particular, to advance U.S. interests through our global
environmental, scientific, and health diplomacy.
I am also deeply grateful to my family, my support and
inspiration. With me here today are my husband, Jeff Kehne, my
father- and mother-in-law, Bruce and Elizabeth Kehne, and my
niece, Meagan Haverkamp. Our two children, Gregory and
Adrianne, very much wish they could be here, but they are busy
wrapping up their end-of-semester college activities far from
Washington.
My parents, were they still alive, would have been
enormously proud. My father, a college educator who served as a
U.S. Navy lieutenant in World War II in the Pacific, and my
mother, a teacher and homemaker who raised six children,
believed deeply in the importance of education, hard work, and
public service.
I am energized and eager to return to government and put my
experience to work advancing American priorities and values. I
would bring to the position a science background, having
majored in biology in college and published ecological field
research. I have dedicated most of my career to public service,
and have worked for the last 22 years in the international
realm. I served as the Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for
Environment and Natural Resources for most of my 10 years at
USTR, and, before, held positions of responsibility at the
Department of Justice, the Environmental Protection Agency, and
the U.S. Court of Appeals. More recently, I have worked and
served on boards in the nonprofit sector, with a focus on
finding practical solutions to confront climate change,
conserve tropical forests, and advance clean energy.
I believe many aspects of my experience, especially at
USTR, will have relevant parallels in the work of OES. These
include strengthening the United States domestically through
international engagement, finding ways to advance U.S. economic
interests while protecting our environmental values, and
promoting health and prosperity abroad, and leveling the
playing field for U.S. companies through advancing
environmental protections in other countries.
Turning to OES: Four decades ago, this Congress created the
Bureau and gave it broad responsibilities for complex and
consequential issues. In the years since, OES's signature
issues of science, technology, and innovation, environment,
oceans, and health have all played increasingly significant
roles in strengthening the U.S. economy, advancing our foreign
policy objectives, and buttressing our leadership positions
around the world.
If confirmed by the Senate, my priorities would be
interwoven and would encompass the themes of investments,
innovation, and inspiration.
First, investments. I would continue and build upon the
strong and effective investments Secretary Kerry is making in
the oceans, the Arctic, climate change, wildlife conservation,
and health. In each of these areas, achieving substantive and
diplomatic gains depends upon making strong and effective
investments in long-term policy development, interagency
coordination, the best analysis, and partnerships with other
governments, the private sector, and civil society.
Second, innovation. Advances in science and technology have
sharpened the need to focus on science diplomacy. To remain the
best innovators in the world, our scientists must have access
to data, research results, and collaboration opportunities with
their international counterparts. And science enables the
United States to exert innovative leadership in averting
catastrophes, whether from mercury contamination, an infectious
disease like Ebola, or severe water shortages.
Third, inspiration. If confirmed, I would work to foster
and capitalize on the tremendous talent and inspiration of the
people in OES to build coalitions and yield important
diplomatic wins.
In closing, I am eager to tackle the staggering pressures
bearing down on the planet's people and natural resources--as
Senator Udall said, from the ocean's depths to the ice-capped
poles and to outer space, and to help shape foreign diplomacy
in these areas for years to come.
If confirmed, I would work hard every day to successfully
carry out the profound responsibility thereby conferred upon
me.
Thank you for your consideration. And I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Haverkamp follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jennifer Ann Haverkamp
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Udall and distinguished
members of the committee.
It is a great privilege for me to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee for Assistant Secretary of State for the
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs
(OES). I am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry for placing
their trust in me to help fashion solutions to the profound challenges
facing our fragile world and the people it must continue to sustain. I
am also grateful for the opportunity to again work with Under Secretary
Catherine Novelli, whose dynamic leadership and excellent judgment I
had the privilege to observe closely during our years together at USTR.
If confirmed, I very much look forward to working with the
Congress, and this committee in particular, to advance the United
States essential environmental, economic, and national security
interests through our global environmental, scientific, and health
diplomacy.
I am also deeply grateful to my family, who have supported and
inspired me throughout my career in public service and international
environmental and trade policy. With me here today are my husband, Jeff
Kehne, my father- and mother-in-law, Bruce and Elizabeth Kehne, of
Columbia (formerly Pikesville), Maryland, and my niece, Meagan
Haverkamp. Our two children very much wish they could be here but our
son Gregory, a college junior, is studying mathematics abroad in
Budapest and our daughter Adrianne is busy completing her freshman year
of college.
My parents, were they still alive, would have been enormously proud
to see this day. My father, a college educator who served as a U.S.
Navy lieutenant in World War II's Pacific Theater, and my mother, a
teacher and homemaker who raised six children, believed deeply in the
importance of education, hard work, and public service. And I can thank
our family's cross-country vacations, which Dad and Mom spent driving
us to see our Nation's spectacular national parks and historic sites,
for sparking my lifelong passion for nature conservation and outdoor
recreation.
Professional background
I am energized and eager to return to government and put my
experience to work advancing American priorities and values. My
professional experiences have attracted me to this position and I might
even argue this is a role I have been preparing for throughout my
career.
I would bring to the position a science background, having majored
in biology in college and published field research on the ecology of
the North American tall-grass prairie. I have dedicated most of my
career to public service, and have worked for the last 22 years in the
international realm. For most of my 10 years at USTR I served as the
Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Environment and Natural
Resources and was a career member of the Senior Executive Service.
Before USTR I also held positions of responsibility at the Department
of Justice, the Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Court of
Appeals. Though working at Foggy Bottom would be a new experience, over
the years I have engaged actively with many of the Department's global
environmental, fisheries, and economic issues and gotten to work with
many of its outstanding officials.
I believe many aspects of my experience at USTR will have relevant
parallels in the work of OES: strengthening the United States
domestically through international engagement; finding ways to advance
U.S. economic interests while protecting our environmental values;
promoting health and prosperity abroad and leveling the playing field
for U.S. companies by advancing environmental protections in other
countries; and recognizing that often the best way to protect
biodiversity is through solutions that accommodate the local
population's economic needs--by making the forests and elephants and
coral reefs worth more alive than dead.
More recently, I worked in the nonprofit sector to find practical
solutions to confront climate change, conserve tropical forests, and
advance clean energy. Addressing and preparing for climate change, one
of the most profound challenges facing our generation, is a key
priority of the President and Secretary Kerry, and cuts across many
aspects of OES's work and that of the Department more broadly.
Overview of OES
Four decades ago, Congress passed legislation creating OES with
broad responsibilities for complex and consequential issues, around the
same time Congress addressed increasingly harmful environmental
degradation by passing landmark environmental and pollution control
legislation. Over the years since those laws were enacted, OES's
signature issues of science, technology, and innovation; environment;
oceans; and health have played increasingly significant roles in
strengthening the U.S. economy, advancing our foreign policy
objectives, and buttressing our leadership position in the world. More
and more, the Department's regional bureaus and embassies consider
OES's deep bench of substantive experts a valuable tool in their
bilateral diplomacy, as the host countries seek out U.S. scientific and
technological cooperation or assistance to address challenges such as
wildlife trafficking or resolving conflicts over access to water
resources. For example, OES experts supported efforts by countries
along the Nile River Basin to establish a cooperative framework for
managing its limited water resources that is expected to contribute to
the region's economic development, peace, and security.
As part of the first Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review
(QDDR) in 2010, OES joined with the Department's Bureau of Economic and
Business Affairs and the Bureau of Energy Resources to become the ``E''
family, now under Under Secretary Novelli's leadership. This
collaborative relationship was reinforced in the recently released
second QDDR. I would welcome the opportunities this structure presents
for close collaboration with these offices, a situation resonant with
my career experiences in international trade, environmental protection,
and clean energy development.
If confirmed by the Senate, my priorities would be interwoven and
would encompass the following themes: investments, innovation, and
inspiration. First, I would like to continue the strong and effective
investments Secretary Kerry is making, especially in the areas of
oceans, the Arctic, climate change, conservation, and health. In each
of these areas, investments in long-term policy development;
interagency coordination; partnerships with other governments, the
private sector, and civil society; and the best analysis will be key to
achieving sustained substantive and diplomatic gains.
Second, innovation. Our knowledge of science to educate and inform
our partners and the public will guide my thinking and bring an
innovative, equitable and cost-effective approach to problemsolving.
Advances in science and technology have brought our world much closer
together and sharpened the need to focus on science diplomacy. To
remain the best in the world, our scientists need access to data,
research results, and collaboration opportunities with their
international counterparts. And science underpins the actions we take
and enables the United States to exert innovative leadership in
averting catastrophes, whether from mercury contamination, an
infectious disease or severe water shortages.
Third, inspiration. I would work to foster and capitalize on the
tremendous talent and inspiration of the people in OES to build
coalitions and partnerships. The Bureau's professionals have been at
the forefront of international efforts to achieve important wins on the
conservation, health, climate change, science, space and trade fronts,
keeping a steady eye on the prize throughout often contentious, hard-
fought negotiations (including some that I have witnessed firsthand).
Priority issues for OES
Across the wide range of issues that fall within OES's
responsibility, I'd like to elaborate on my key priorities, if
confirmed:
Oceans
The oceans, covering almost three-quarters of the planet, are vital
resources for food, for transportation, for energy, for tourism.
Secretary Kerry has rightly made global oceans policy a top priority of
the Department, and if confirmed I look forward to throwing my energy
into those efforts.
The key initiatives coming out of last June's successful Our Ocean
international conference include goals to advance sustainable
fisheries, reduce pollution entering the marine environment, stem the
increase of ocean acidification, and protect ocean areas. One OES
priority in 2015 is carrying out a plan developed by President Obama's
Task Force on Combating Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing
and Seafood Fraud. Implementing this plan to combat IUU fishing and
seafood fraud will help level the playing field for American fishermen
and fishing businesses who play by the rules.
I would also prioritize OES's role in promoting sustainable global
fisheries for the world's people who depend on oceans for their food
and their livelihoods. Over 1 billion people worldwide rely on food
from the ocean as their primary source of protein. OES is involved in a
wide range of negotiations addressing the conservation and management
of global fish stocks. The economic benefit to the United States
generated by the fisheries subject to these negotiations, or managed by
the regional fisheries management organizations within which many such
negotiations occur, is estimated at between $12-$15 billion each year.
These negotiations affect economic interests and stakeholders in
virtually all parts of the United States, including the Pacific and
Atlantic coasts, Gulf of Mexico, Alaska, Hawaii and the U.S. Pacific
territories.
I am grateful the Senate gave its advice and consent to U.S.
ratification of four important fisheries treaties last spring, and look
forward, if confirmed, to working with Congress, members of the Oceans
Caucus and this committee to implement them. Illustrative of these
agreements' contribution to safeguarding U.S. economic interests is the
Agreement on Port State Measures to Prevent, Deter, and Eliminate
Illegal, Unreported, and Unregulated Fishing. The Port State Measures
Agreement combats these harmful fisheries practices through the
implementation of robust, globally consistent requirements of parties,
in their capacity as port States, to refuse port entry or access for
landing fish, transshipment, packaging, processing, or servicing a ship
if the ship is known to have engaged in IUU fishing. The U.S. fishing
industry benefits when its competitors are compelled to also follow the
rule of law, and I look forward to contributing to these efforts.
Arctic
As part of OES's responsibility for oceans and polar affairs, in
recent years the Bureau has deepened its engagement with other Arctic
countries, as the region's changing climate and receding ice cover have
necessitated greater attention to emerging issues. As more Arctic
waters become navigable and fishable, the need escalates for greater
Arctic science cooperation, sustainable fisheries management, and
protection of a fragile ecosystem newly opening to shipping, economic
development and resource extraction. The Arctic is an excellent example
of how U.S. environmental and natural resource conservation interests
are inextricably entwined with our economic and national security
interests, and must be an integral part of our diplomatic efforts.
In April, the United States took over from Canada the 2-year
rotating chairmanship of the Arctic Council, an intergovernmental forum
made up of those eight nations with land territory above the Arctic
Circle. The Council's priorities during the U.S. chairmanship will
focus on stewardship of the Arctic Ocean, improving economic and living
conditions for the people of the region, and addressing the effects of
climate change in the Arctic. If confirmed, I look forward to working
closely with Admiral Papp, the Department's Special Representative for
the Arctic, as well as with other bureaus and government agencies, to
make the best use of this important diplomatic opportunity.
Climate change
The Department's 2015 Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review
focuses on four global policy priorities, including mitigating and
adapting to climate change. As Secretary Kerry stated in his March 2015
speech before the Atlantic Council, climate change, like epidemics,
poverty, extremism, and nuclear proliferation, is a challenge that
respects no borders. He has also spoken frequently of our
responsibility to future generations as stewards of the Earth.
If confirmed, I would look forward to supporting the Office of the
Special Envoy on Climate Change (SECC), the Department's lead on
international negotiations on climate change. Although OES does not
lead this work, the Bureau lends its scientific and technical expertise
to SECC. One example in particular is the work the Bureau is
undertaking with Mexico and Canada to gain broad international support
for an agreement to dramatically reduce hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) in
the atmosphere. The health and economic benefits that would be derived
from eliminating 90 billion tons of carbon dioxide-equivalent through
2050 would be enormous. If confirmed, I would lend my professional
expertise in the trade, economics, and environmental arena to ensure
that the support the Bureau provides in confronting climate change is
scientifically based, results oriented and of tremendous value to the
American people.
Wildlife trafficking
Wildlife trafficking is a critical conservation concern and a
threat to our country's national security. The illegal trade in
wildlife has devastating impacts: it fuels corruption and undermines
the rule of law, hinders economic development, contributes to the
spread of disease, and is pushing some species to the brink of
extinction. It is compromising the tourism-based economies of
vulnerable African countries and, in some instances, is being used to
finance organized crime, insurgencies, and possibly terrorism.
The toll on iconic species is horrific: the forest elephant
populations in Central Africa, for instance, declined by approximately
two-thirds between just 2002 and 2012. And while elephants and
endangered rhinos slaughtered for their ivory first come to mind, many
other species from most continents, including black coral, turtles and
tortoises, iguanas, tropical birds, pangolins and primates, are all at
risk. The United States is both a link in the transit chain and a final
destination for some wildlife and wildlife products; our international
efforts focused on reducing both supply and demand must and will be
pursued in tandem with domestic actions.
The OES Bureau has an important role to play in carrying out the
Implementation Plan for the National Strategy for Combatting Wildlife
Trafficking, issued in February. The Plan provides details for how the
National Strategy's goals will be achieved and how progress will be
measured. OES is leading coordination of two elements of the strategy:
the international cooperation and partnerships and demand reduction
components. OES is also contributing, through its support for regional
wildlife enforcement networks (WENs) worldwide, to the global
enforcement element.
The United States ramped-up efforts are beginning to pay off. We
have, notably, reached agreements with China to cooperate in our
efforts to combat wildlife trafficking. But there is still an enormous
amount of work to be done, and if confirmed I would ensure that the
Bureau's resources are deployed effectively in the fight against this
global scourge.
Global health diplomacy
Before the daunting challenges of Ebola fade in memory, the United
States Government needs to incorporate its lessons learned into our
broader global health diplomacy, to better inform our Nation's
responses to the inevitable future pandemics, wherever and whenever
they may arise. The Ebola outbreak is but the latest evidence that the
world has far to go to be ready to prevent, detect, and respond to
these global health security threats, and OES is well-positioned to
help address this problem. The Global Health Security Agenda, a 44-
country effort launched by the United States in 2014, has now gained
over 100 new concrete commitments to prevent, detect, and rapidly
respond to infectious disease threats before they become epidemics like
Ebola. The Bureau supports this vital priority by working among these
countries and with relevant international organizations to achieve the
Agenda's targets. Among other efforts, the Bureau is also working to
expand the number of countries able to meet their obligations to the
World Health Organization to develop certain core capacities to detect,
assess, notify, and report public health emergencies of international
concern.
OES plays a critical, though often behind the scenes, role in
global health diplomacy. The Bureau works closely with the Department's
regional and functional bureaus, special representatives and other U.S.
entities (CDC, HHS, DOD, USAID, et al.) with important roles in global
health policy. The strong relationships that U.S. expert agencies have
developed with their international counterparts are vital to advancing
global health. But as we learned from Ebola, in a crisis, to mobilize
the global resources needed, and to coordinate the efforts of multiple
entities, it takes the high level, cross-cutting diplomacy that the
State Department does so well. If confirmed, I would apply myself to
finding ways to strengthen the international and interagency
coordination on shared global health priorities, and to advancing
global pandemic readiness.
Science and technology--promoting innovation and
entrepreneurship
As I mentioned earlier, I consider the deployment of U.S.
scientific and technological expertise, and our leadership in
innovation, to be an important engine of diplomacy and global
development. Equally important is to support the Secretary's efforts to
increase the role of science across the work of the State Department.
Innovation and entrepreneurship have been fundamental drivers of
U.S. economic growth since our country's founding, and promoting
innovation abroad is an especially promising area of U.S. diplomacy. In
this vein, OES has developed a Global Innovation through Science and
Technology (GIST) initiative, which trains young entrepreneurs. GIST,
itself an excellent example of bringing an innovative approach to
diplomacy, has to date led to businesses that generated over $80
million in revenue. The program has worked in 86 emerging economies
with over 2.6 million innovators and entrepreneurs around the world,
providing training to over 4,500 startups. If confirmed, I would work
to grow this program, which gives hope to young entrepreneurs and
creates jobs in countries where the lack of economic opportunity can
sow unrest and threaten our national security.
Closing
I am excited about the prospect of leading a bureau that brings to
bear the best analysis to help pioneer scientific and technological
breakthroughs. I am excited to tackle the staggering pressures bearing
down on natural resources, from the oceans' depths to the ice-capped
poles, to the savannas and to outer space, and to help shape foreign
diplomacy in these areas for years to come.
If confirmed, I would work hard every day to deserve the
extraordinary honor and carry out the profound responsibility thereby
conferred upon me.
Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to your
questions.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you. Congratulations, again.
I will next move to Ms. Occomy.
STATEMENT OF MARCIA DENISE OCCOMY, NOMINATED TO BE U.S.
DIRECTOR OF THE AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT BANK
Ms. Occomy. Thank you, Chairman and distinguished members
of the committee. I am grateful for the opportunity to appear
before you today.
I am honored that President Obama has nominated me to serve
as the U.S. Executive Director for the African Development
Bank.
I grew up in Chicago in a family of excellent role models
who taught me the importance of hard work, discipline, and
focus to be successful in life. My grandmother was one of the
first African-American women to attend Radcliffe College in the
early 1900s, and later became a prominent writer during the
Harlem Renaissance. My father entered the University of Chicago
at the age of 15, excelling in math and later becoming a
computer executive in the retail industry in Chicago. My mother
taught public schools for over 30 years, dedicating her life to
public service. They and many others have influenced my
decision, in part, to pursue an international development
career later in my life.
If confirmed as the U.S. Executive Director to the African
Development Bank, my vision is to leverage my international
development experience to support U.S. interests in seeing the
African Development Bank carry out its mission to promote
economic development and progress across Africa.
Boosting growth is important for the African Continent but
also for the United States by opening new markets and providing
new customers for American goods and services. I have years of
experience as a fiscal reform adviser on USAID-financed
projects in developing in post-conflict countries. I have
advised Ministries of Finance as they underwent public
financial management reforms to strengthen their revenues and
to build financial systems and capacity to put the country on
the path towards economic growth. I have worked in countries in
Central Asia, the Middle East, Central Europe, and in Africa,
Egypt, Senegal, and, most recently, in the newest independent
nation, South Sudan. I have experienced firsthand when
countries struggle to balance implementation of sound fiscal
policies while seeking to maintain political stability and
security. I was in South Sudan and directly involved in
assisting the country in post-conflict recovery efforts. Prior
to my fiscal reform project implementation experience, I worked
as a policy analyst at OMB during the 1990s.
I also have experience leveraging public-private
partnerships for important local economic development projects.
As a University of Chicago graduate student on a Patricia
Harris Fellowship, I worked with the Habitat Company, a leading
real-estate development firm which partnered with the Chicago
Housing Authority to build scattered-site housing for public-
housing residents to better integrate them into the broader
community. This project was a model for how the public and
private sector can partner to address a social issue
effectively. I recognize that leveraging private-sector
investment solutions and technologies will be a critical aspect
of the future development of Africa, as well. I look forward to
supporting the African Development Bank to leverage the
financing instruments, to encourage private investment in
Africa, including through public-private partnerships.
During his July 2013 visit to Africa, President Obama
launched the Power Africa Initiative, a $7 billion, 5-year
initiative to double access to electricity in sub-Saharan
Africa, in partnership with African countries and the private
sector.
When President Obama launched the Power Africa Initiative
in Tanzania, African Development Bank president Donald Kaberuka
joined him as a symbol of how the United States and Africa are
working together to promote inclusive growth in the region.
Attracting private investors to Africa will require
significant investment in infrastructure and a climate that is
conducive to investment. Creating the right investment climate
will depend on Africa's commitment and ability to improve
governance, transparency, regional integration, and to build a
skilled workforce. The African Development Bank has played a
leading role in assisting African countries to address those
issues, but more work remains to be done.
If confirmed, I commit to being a good steward of U.S.
financial contributions to the bank and to ensure that the bank
furthers U.S. economic and security interests.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for
considering my nomination. I look forward to answering your
questions today.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Occomy follows:]
Prepared Statement by Marcia Denise Occomy
Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Udall, and distinguished members
of the committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before
you today. I am honored that President Obama has nominated me to serve
as the U.S. Executive Director for the African Development Bank.
I grew up in Chicago in a family of excellent role models who
taught me the importance of hard work, discipline, and focus to be
successful in life. My grandmother was one of the first African
American women to attend Radcliffe College in the early 1900s and later
became a prominent writer during the Harlem Renaissance. My father
entered the University of Chicago at the age of 15 excelling in math
and later becoming a computer executive in the retail industry in
Chicago. My mother taught public schools for over 30 years dedicating
her life to public service. They and many others have influenced my
decision in part to pursue an international development career later in
my life.
If confirmed as USED, my vision is to leverage my international
development experience to support U.S. interests in seeing the African
Development Bank carry out its mission to promote economic development
and progress across Africa. Boosting growth is important for the
African Continent, but also for the United States, by opening new
markets and providing new customers for American goods and services. I
have years of experience as a fiscal reform advisor on USAID-financed
projects in developing and post conflict countries. I have advised
Ministries of Finance as they underwent public financial management
reforms to strengthen their revenues and to build financial systems and
capacity to put the country on a path toward economic growth, while
building political capacity. I have worked in such countries as
Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan, and in Africa--Egypt, Senegal
and most recently in the newest independent nation South Sudan. I have
experienced firsthand when countries struggle to balance implementation
of sound fiscal policies, while seeking to maintain political stability
and security. I was in South Sudan and directly involved in assisting
the country in post conflict recovery efforts. Prior to my fiscal
reform project implementation experience, I worked as a policy analyst
at the OMB during the 1990s.
I also have experience leveraging public-private partnerships for
important local economic development projects. As a University of
Chicago graduate student on a Patricia Harris Fellowship, I worked with
Habitat Company, a leading real estate development firm which partnered
with the Chicago Housing Authority to build scattered site housing for
public housing residents to better integrate them into the broader
community. This project was a model for how the public and private
sector can partner to address a social issue effectively. I recognize
that leveraging private sector investment, solutions and technologies
will be a critical aspect of the future development of Africa as well.
I look forward to supporting the African Development Bank to leverage
its financing instruments to encourage private investment in Africa
including through public-private partnerships.
During his July 2013 visit to Africa, President Obama launched the
Power Africa Initiative, a $7 billion, 5-year initiative to double
access to electricity in sub-Saharan Africa in partnership with African
countries and the private sector. In announcing this key initiative the
President noted, ``America's been involved in Africa for decades but we
are moving beyond a simple provision of assistance . . . to a new
model, a partnership between America and Africa, a partnership of
equals that focuses on (Africa's) capacity to solve problems and
(Africa's) capacity to grow.''
I embrace the President's vision. When President Obama launched the
Power Africa Initiative in Tanzania, African Development Bank President
Donald Kaberuka joined him as a symbol of how the United States and
Africa can work together to promote inclusive growth in the region.
Attracting private investors to Africa will require significant
investment in infrastructure and a climate that is conducive to
investment in Africa. Creating the right investment climate will depend
on Africa's commitment and ability to improve governance, transparency,
regional integration and to build a skilled workforce. The African
Development Bank has played a leading role in assisting African
countries to address these issues, but more work remains to be done.
If confirmed, I commit to being a good steward of U.S. financial
contributions to the bank and to ensure that the Bank supports our
Nation's inherent values--recognizing that open societies are the
strongest societies; transparent systems are the most successful
systems; and countries that commit to equally helping their citizens be
healthy and educated, with economic opportunities will be the most
prosperous.
Thank you again for considering my nomination, and I look forward
to answering any additional questions you may have.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Now we will hear from Mr. Sabharwal.
STATEMENT OF SUNIL SABHARWAL, NOMINATED TO BE U.S. ALTERNATE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND
Mr. Sabharwal. Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Udall,
distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to
appear before you today to present my personal and professional
credentials for the position of the United States Alternate
Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund.
I am grateful for President Obama for nominating me to this
important office, and to Secretary Lew for his confidence and
support. I also do want to thank the committee staff who have
taken time to meet with me in the confirmation process.
If confirmed I look forward to advancing our shared
commitment to make the IMF an even more effective organization
and one where U.S. interests are strongly represented,
promoted, and defended.
I would like to introduce the members of my family who are
here with me today: my wife, Gabrielle, of 24 years, who has
given up her forensic sciences career to follow me around the
world and help me raise the family; my son, Nicolas, who just
finished his sophomore year at Duke University studying
computer sciences. He is accompanied by two of his college
friends. It is great to see interest in the political process
amongst youth.
Senator Barrasso. You will be paying for dinner tonight.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Sabharwal. We did not talk about that yet. [Laughter.]
Who is missing--of course, the busiest person in the family
is always the youngest, and that is my daughter, Isabella. She
is 16, a sophomore at the Cathedral School, who simply did not
want to give up her orchestra practice and her track-and-field
practice 2 days before the D.C. State Championships, and her
chemistry exam, shockingly. So, we are missing her.
I have submitted my written statement for the record. I do
not intend to read that in its entirety here. However, I would
like to point out, just briefly, that I arrived in this country
32 years ago from Communist Hungary. My family--my mother,
brother, and I--we fled and arrived at the United States
Embassy in Vienna, sought political asylum, and, through the
support of a number of families, churches, organizations,
charities, I managed to enroll college and start a professional
career. I am extremely, eternally grateful to this country. And
I am now looking to give back.
In the 27 or so years of my professional career, I had an
opportunity to serve both on the public sector and
predominantly on the private-sector side of things. In the
public-sector capacity, I was an early American employee at the
EBRD, the European Bank for Reconstruction Development, shortly
after its inception, where I really found an appreciation of
the role an IFI can play in funding infrastructure projects,
creating institutions, and providing comfort to private-sector
investment and engagement. However, as you have seen in the
testimony, the majority of my experiences are in the private
sector as an investor in financial services and financial
technology.
With my various positions, I have had a chance to travel
and live around the world. And I believe this professional
background, coupled with my volunteer experiences with the
sports movement and Olympic organizations, really have given me
an opportunity to deal with people from every single continent
from many, many countries. And this, I feel, has prepared me
well to carry out the duties, if confirmed, of the U.S.
Alternate Executive Director at the IMF. I think this is an
important skill when you are dealing with an institution with
up to 200 members and where you need their support to engage
with you on a wide range of issues.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear here today. I would
be pleased to answer any questions and, if confirmed, of
course, working with you and your staff on a range of issues
affecting the IMF.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Sabharwal follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sunil Sabharwal
Chairman Barrasso, Ranking Member Udall, and distinguished members
of the committee, it is an honor to appear before you today to present
my personal and professional credentials for the position of United
States Alternate Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund
(IMF).
I am grateful to the President for nominating me to this important
office and to Secretary Lew for his confidence and support. If
confirmed, I look forward to advancing our shared commitment to make
the IMF an even more effective organization and one where U.S.
interests are strongly represented, promoted, and defended.
I would like to introduce members of my family, who are here with
me today: starting with my son, Nicolas, who is a sophomore at Duke
University with an interest in engineering and the sciences. My
daughter, Izabella, who is a sophomore in High School at the National
Cathedral School, and is vying to follow her grandfather to be an
Olympian track athlete, and finally my wife, Gabrielle, with a Forensic
Sciences background whose attention to detail has helped me get through
all the documents needed prior to me sitting here in front of you. We
also share a common passion for the sport of fencing as we met 25 years
ago in Culver City, CA, in a fencing club and continue our involvement
with the sport and the Olympic movement.
I was born in New Delhi, India, to an Indian father and a Hungarian
mother. My parents separated when I was 9, and I moved to Budapest
Hungary part of the Soviet Block at the time. Following my mother's
refusal to join the Communist Party, she was refused a business permit,
was constantly harassed for her religious beliefs--in the end giving
the family no choice but fleeing the country and seeking asylum at the
U.S. Embassy in Vienna. I had just finished high school.
Through the cooperation of the U.S. State Department, the United
Nations, and charitable organizations, we received political asylum in
the United States, more precisely in Columbus, OH, and with specific
assistance by the Upper Arlington Lutheran Church. To date, I will
never forget the reception we received in Columbus, in December of 1983
(just a couple of days before Christmas) and will remain forever
grateful to Professor Cole and his family who enabled me to enroll at
the Ohio State University weeks after my arrival. While I put myself
through college with the use of financial aid, work-study, and
scholarships, my family moved to California. Upon graduation, I joined
them to begin my professional career.
When I left Hungary in 1983, I thought it was for good. Little did
we know that less than 10 years later, massive political changes would
sweep the region free. One of the first institutions created to foster
the transition of the region was the European Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (EBRD), and I was fortunate enough to play a meaningful
role in the region's transition as an American citizen and EBRD
employee.
I established the EBRD office in Budapest in early 1992, a time in
which Hungary was at the forefront of innovative foreign direct
investment legislation and regulations. This experience allowed me to
participate in landmark public and private sector transactions,
including the first bank and telecomm privatizations, infrastructure
projects, municipal finance, and venture capital deals of Central and
Eastern Europe. In 1995, I transitioned to London to join the EBRD's
headquarters staff as a member of its Financial Institutions team,
which had the responsibility of investing in, and lending to, banks in
the region. The 5 years I spent at the EBRD had shaped my early
professional career and have had a significant impact throughout. I
then spent about 10 years working for GE and First Data Corporation,
most of it focused on investing in the financial services sector or
companies that provide services to the financial services industry. For
the last 8 years, I have served as an independent investor and adviser
focused on the financial services, or ``fintech'' sector.
As a result of my global upbringing, through which I gained an
ability to relate to people around the world, and my 25 years of tenure
in the financial services sector--in both public and private domains--I
am equipped with the experience necessary to carry out successfully the
duties, if confirmed, of the U.S. Alternate Executive Director at the
IMF. In addition, my language skills and volunteer experiences are also
highly relevant in a body where we need to get representatives of
nearly 200 countries to support us on a wide-ranging set of issues.
I look forward to answering your questions, and, if confirmed, to
working with members of the committee on policy matters affecting the
IMF.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before the committee today.
I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you for your testimony.
Congratulations, again.
And now, finally, Mr. Egan.
STATEMENT OF BRIAN JAMES EGAN, NOMINATED TO BE LEGAL ADVISER OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Mr. Egan. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Udall, and members
of the subcommittee, it is an honor to appear before you today
as President Obama's nominee to serve as Legal Adviser to the
Department of State.
I am humbled by the trust that the President and Secretary
Kerry have placed in me, and I am grateful to the committee for
considering my nomination. I also appreciate the opportunity I
have had to meet with committee staff, before this hearing, for
productive discussions on a range of topics.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me to introduce my wife, Amy,
and my children, Sally, Niles, and Damon, who are happy to have
a half day of school to attend this afternoon's event. As you
know, government service often requires long and unpredictable
hours, which take a toll on our families. And I want to thank
my family for the sacrifices they have made to enable me to
pursue my passion for public service. I would not be able to
carry out my current responsibilities, and I could not
contemplate assuming the duties that I hope you will see fit to
entrust to me, without their love and support.
I would also like to introduce my father, Dennis Egan, who,
by example, has taught me the importance of hard work,
independent judgment, and kindness in raising myself and my
five brothers and sisters.
I am particularly honored to have been nominated for this
position because serving as the Legal Adviser would mark a
homecoming for me. Although I began my career as a lawyer in
private practice, my calling has always been public service,
and I have spent the past 10 years as a government lawyer,
starting as a career attorney in the Office of the Legal
Adviser. From my time there, I know that the Office of the
Legal Adviser plays a critical role in advancing U.S. foreign
policy and national security by providing high-quality and
objective legal advice to the Secretary of State and other
policymakers. The over 200 career lawyers and other
professionals who make up the office strive to promote and
protect U.S. interests around the world every day, without
regard to party or politics, and in areas ranging from
counterterrorism, law enforcement, and nuclear nonproliferation
to the promotion of American trade and business and the
protection of American citizens abroad.
I have dedicated my career to public service, to play a
part, however small, in helping address the many legal
challenges that are faced by the greatest democracy in the
world. If confirmed, I would seek to uphold the office's
tradition of providing rigorous and objective legal analysis in
furtherance of our Nation's interests at home and around the
world.
In my career, I have had the good fortune of being able to
work in a number of national security legal positions with
lawyers from around the government. And since 2013, I have been
the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council. In my
current role, I have the privilege of working every day with
the President, Ambassador Rice, and other senior national
security officials on a broad range of complex domestic and
international legal issues. And in this capacity, I have had
the privilege of working closely with general counsels and
other senior lawyers from around the government, including the
Departments of Justice, Defense, Commerce, Homeland Security,
and the Treasury, the Director of National Intelligence, the
CIA, and, of course, the Department of State. I have benefited
immensely from the wisdom and counsel of Mary McLeod, who has
served as State's Legal Adviser in an acting capacity for over
2 years, and many of the other outstanding attorneys who serve
in the office that is known as L at the State Department.
Prior to serving in my current job, I worked at the
Treasury Department as Assistant General Counsel for
Enforcement Intelligence from 2012 to 2013, and my first job
after graduating college was with the Department of Justice,
where I served as a legal assistant in the Antitrust Division
for nearly 3 years.
My experience in government have taught me a considerable
amount about leadership, responsibility, problem solving, and
collaboration. And these experience have deepened my conviction
that we are best able to confront the foreign policy challenges
that we face as a nation when the executive and legislative
branches work together to address those challenges. While we
may not always see the same issues in precisely the same way,
or reach the same conclusions, if confirmed, I would be
committed to maintaining an open dialogue with this committee
on the issues that I will be responsible for as Legal Adviser.
Thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to
answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Egan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Brian James Egan
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Udall, and members of the committee,
it is an honor to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee
to serve as Legal Adviser to the Department of State. I am humbled by
the trust the President and Secretary Kerry have placed in me, and I am
grateful to the committee for considering my nomination. I also
appreciate the opportunity I have had to meet with committee staff
before this hearing for what I found to be productive conversations on
a range of topics.
Mr. Chairman, please allow me to introduce my wife, Amy, and my
children, Sally, Niles, and Damon. As each of you can attest,
government service often requires long and unpredictable hours, which
take a toll on our families. I want to thank my family for the
sacrifices they have made to enable me to pursue my passion for public
service. I would not be able to carry out my current responsibilities--
and I could not contemplate assuming the new duties I hope you will see
fit to entrust to me--without their continued love and support. I would
also like to introduce my father, Dennis Egan, who by example has
taught me the importance of hard work, independent judgment, and
kindness.
I am particularly honored to have been nominated for this position
because serving as Legal Adviser would mark a homecoming for me.
Although I began my career as a lawyer in private practice, my calling
has always been public service. I have spent the past 10 years as a
government lawyer, starting as a career attorney in the Office of the
Legal Adviser.
From my previous time there, I know that the Office of the Legal
Adviser plays a critical role in advancing U.S. foreign policy and
national security by providing high quality, objective legal advice to
the Secretary of State, other policymakers within the Department of
State, and departments and agencies across the Federal Government. The
over 200 career lawyers and other professionals who make up the Office
of the Legal Adviser strive to promote and protect U.S. interests
around the world every day. They do so, without regard to party or
politics, in areas ranging from counterterrorism, law enforcement, and
nuclear nonproliferation to the promotion of American trade and
business and the protection of American citizens abroad.
I have dedicated my career to government service to play a part,
however small, in helping to address the many challenges faced by the
greatest democracy in the world. If confirmed, I would seek to uphold
the Office of the Legal Adviser's tradition of producing rigorous and
objective legal analysis in furtherance of our Nation's interests at
home and around the world.
Beyond working at the Legal Adviser's Office, I have had the good
fortune of being able to work in a number of other national security
legal jobs, with lawyers from across the Federal Government. Since
2013, I have been the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council
and Deputy Counsel to the President. In my current role, I have the
privilege of working every day to enhance the security and prosperity
of the United States and the American people by advising the President,
Ambassador Rice, and other senior national security officials on a
broad range of complex domestic and international legal issues.
I have worked closely with the General Counsels and other senior
lawyers of departments and agencies throughout the government,
including the Departments of Justice, Defense, Commerce, Homeland
Security, and the Treasury; the Office of the Director of National
Intelligence; the Central Intelligence Agency; and, of course, the
Department of State. I have benefited from the wisdom and counsel of
Mary McLeod, who has served as State's Legal Adviser in an acting
capacity for over 2 years, and many of the other outstanding attorneys
who serve in the Office of the Legal Adviser.
Prior to serving as Legal Adviser to the National Security Council,
I worked at the Department of the Treasury as Assistant General Counsel
for Enforcement and Intelligence from 2012 to 2013. In that capacity, I
was responsible for a staff of approximately 50 attorneys who provided
legal advice and counsel on combating terrorism financing and other
financial crimes, ensuring the effectiveness of U.S. financial
sanctions regimes, and other issues related to Treasury's enforcement
and intelligence responsibilities. And my first job after graduating
from college was with the Department of Justice, where I served as a
legal assistant in the Antitrust Division for nearly 3 years.
My experiences in government have taught me a great deal about
leadership, responsibility, problemsolving, and collaboration. These
experiences also have deepened my conviction that we are best able to
confront the foreign policy challenges we face as a nation when the
executive and legislative branches work together to address those
challenges. While we may not always see the issues in precisely the
same way or reach the same conclusions, if confirmed I would be
committed to maintaining an open dialogue with this committee on the
issues that I will be responsible for as Legal Adviser.
The challenges we face as a nation in the areas of foreign policy
and national security are increasingly complex, and the legal issues
that underlie some of these challenges are equally complex. Our
Nation's leaders require the best possible legal advice to navigate
these challenges, consistent with the Constitution and our commitment
to the rule of law. If confirmed, I commit to you that I will do my
best to provide that advice.
Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to answering your
questions.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you so much for your
testimony. And welcome, to your family, as well.
Ms. Guilarte, the Latin American/Caribbean region have
incredibly high energy costs, I think insufficient rates of
investment; they rely on energy resources, such as Venezuelan
oil, which may not be suitable, in the long run, in terms of
sustainability. The countries are dependent on excess--on very
expensive fuel. And I think we have an opportunity--and three
members of this committee who are here today have all supported
legislation--to make it a little easier for us to export U.S.
natural gas, as well, and want to use the knowledge and the
technology we have in the United States. Natural gas can be
helpful in economies, because it provides a--much more
affordable energy.
So, in your role, if confirmed, at the International--at
the Inter-American Development Bank, you know, they talk about
electricity demand in Latin America and the Caribbean, it is
going to be doubling over the next decade. And they are looking
at economic development role that natural gas can play. So, I
am going to ask if you know of any steps right now that the
Inter-American Development Bank is taking to provide the region
with energy security and diversification through natural gas,
and what role you would like to play in that.
Ms. Guilarte. Thank you, Chairman, for your question.
I can understand your concern specifically about Venezuela
and how their influence, especially on the ALBA members,
especially those in the Caribbean and Central America, can have
really a crisis situation, the way things are unfolding in
Venezuela, and the impact that that could have in the region.
In terms of coal energy projects and what can be done
better at the IDB, certainly all projects that come to the
board are given full consideration. At the moment, there are no
corelated projects----
Senator Barrasso. And, I am sorry, I asked about natural
gas.
Ms. Guilarte. This--natural gas.
Senator Barrasso. Natural gas, yes.
Ms. Guilarte. If confirmed, what I can do, in my capacity,
is that, one, I will make sure that those related projects that
come to the board are given full consideration that it meets
the needs of the country's energy demands, that we consider all
relevant alternative approaches, and that ultimately they are
sustainable, both financially and environmentally. I understand
that the administration is also, through their Alliance for
Prosperity, creating--in Central America--is looking at
providing better and more diversed opportunities on energy
efficiency approaches.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with you and
members of this committee in ensuring that we look at all the
range of options available.
Senator Barrasso. Yes. But, I would say that, knowing that
there was significant bipartisan support and an opportunity for
affordable energy, it is something that I think would benefit
that area.
Senator Corker, I am happy to turn my time over to you. I
know you are on a tighter schedule, and you are chairman of
this committee. So----
The Chairman. Well, I really appreciate you letting me do
this. I know I am--you know I am here for just one of the
witnesses and--or nominees. But, thank all of you for letting
me doing--thank you for your service to the country that is
getting ready to be in, in a different role, anyway.
To Mr. Egan, I just wanted to ask a few questions. I think
you know I was going to do this. So, thank you for your
willingness.
Congress has long understood that the 2001 AUMF covered al-
Qaeda and the associated forces of al-Qaeda. Would you please
describe the administration's legal view of why it is that ISIS
is covered by the 2001 AUMF? And again, thank you for your
continued service.
Mr. Egan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your question.
The administration's position is that the 2001 AUMF does
cover the ongoing military operations against ISIL. And I think
the key fact which is reflected most recently in a speech that
the general counsel from the Defense Department gave--Steven
Preston--about a month ago, is that ISIL is essentially the
remnants of a group that was formerly known as Al Qaeda in
Iraq, a group that we fought in Iraq for a number of years and
that broke from al-Qaeda in 2013. The administration's view is
that the break of that group should not change the legal
authority to use force against that group. Given that ISIL, as
it is now known, continues to fight Americans and American
interests in Iraq, they believe that they are the true
successor to Osama bin Laden, and they are, in fact, competing
for affiliation of groups with al-Qaeda right now. And that is
why the administration's view is that ISIL is subject to the
2001 AUMF.
The Chairman. And does the administration currently have
the statutory or article 2 authority to defend the United
States or coalition-trained forces in Iraq and Syria if those
forces come under direct threat from ISIS--al-Nusra, Assad
regime forces, Hezbollah, or any other armed groups? As you
know, we have a train-and-equip program that is underway. And,
as you know--well, anyway, I will let you answer the question.
Mr. Egan. Senator, I should have, of course, noted the
administration's proposal, which this committee has considered,
for new authorization to use military force, which would be
specific to the threat posed by ISIL in Iraq and Syria. The
administration's view is, at this time, we would have the
authority to use force against ISIL and against the Nusra Front
to defend our personnel in Iraq and Syria. I would say, to the
extent that those personnel came under attack, we would--the
President would likely have article 2 authority against anyone
who had attacked them. But, we do have an AUMF that this
committee has--that you have considered, that reflects the
President's view on the appropriate scope of military force
against ISIL in Iraq and Syria.
The Chairman. Well, actually, that is not true. Martin
Dempsey and several--Ash Carter and several witnesses who came
before us said that they did not have the authority to defend
against Assad if the train-and-equip people that are not our
folks--they are not part of our coalition, they are people that
we are training in Syria to deal with both ISIS--well, we--in
this particular case, ISIS. We may have another program. There
may be another alleged program against Assad. But, they
actually say they do not have that authority.
So, you are saying that you believe we do have that
authority now to defend them against barrel bombs from Assad.
They said they had not sought that authority, and there was
actually an internal debate right now within the administration
as to whether to seek that authority.
Mr. Egan. Then, Senator, I apologize. Maybe I misunderstood
your question. I thought you were asking about our authority to
defend our----
The Chairman. Right.
Mr. Egan [continuing]. Troops who are currently stationed
in Iraq----
The Chairman. No.
Mr. Egan [continuing]. Which I think is a slightly
different question.
The Chairman. The Syrian opposition train-and-equip group,
we do not have that authority, would you agree?
Mr. Egan. We would have the authority to conduct military
operations against ISIL and al-Qaeda under the same rationale
that we do to conduct our own direct operations against those
groups. I think the question of our authority to use force
against the Assad regime is a more difficult question, and, you
are correct, sir, that that is one that is under policy
consideration within the administration right now.
The Chairman. To defend the very people that we are
training to go in and be on the ground.
Mr. Egan. That is correct.
The Chairman. Okay.
I will just ask one more. And I want to thank the chairman
for allowing me to do this, and the ranking member.
With United States forces on the ground in Iraq conducting
activities in both Iraq and in Syria, what authority to protect
and defend those forces, if any, is currently available under
the 2001 or 2002 AUMFs? And is there something additional you
gain under the 2002 AUMF that is not in the 2001 AUMF? I think
you know the committee is looking at a number of things, one of
which is the relevance of the 2002 AUMF. And I would appreciate
it if you would answer that.
Mr. Egan. Thank you, Senator.
So, the administration's position is that both the 2001
AUMF and the 2002 AUMF provide authority for the current
military operations in Iraq and Syria. The President's AUMF
proposal would, among other things, repeal the 2002 AUMF. And
that is because he believes that the authority we have in both
his proposal and in the 2001 AUMF would be sufficient to
conduct the operations that are ongoing in Iraq and Syria.
The Chairman. And so, just to summarize so that you have
been asked the same question that every other administration
witness that has these kinds of responsibilities, you believe
that, today, there is no authorization necessary--no additional
authorization necessary to deal with ISIS--or ISIL, as you
would call them--or Daesh, as some may call them.
Mr. Egan. Senator, as a legal matter, I believe that we
have the authorization that we need. I think the President has
been clear that he believes that there are other reasons that
it is important for this committee to continue its work on the
AUMF. But, as a legal matter, our view is that we have the
authority we need to conduct military operations against ISIL.
The Chairman. Thank you.
And I will wish you the best, all of you, in your
nomination testimony.
And thank you very much for this courtesy, both of you.
Thank you.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Udall.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Chairman Barrasso.
Executive Director Guilarte, the Inter-American Development
Bank has partnered with the Obama administration on several
initiatives in Latin America. These include the Micro-Finance
Growth Fund for the Western Hemisphere, announced at the fifth
Summit of the Americas in April 2009, and the Women's
Entrepreneurship in the Americas, announced at the sixth Summit
of the Americas in April 2012. What are the objectives of these
initiatives? And what have they accomplished so far?
Ms. Guilarte. Chairman, I appreciate the question. I am
sorry. Senator.
I am not familiar with the initiatives, in entirety, and I
would appreciate if I can get back to the committee----
Senator Udall. That would be great.
Ms. Guilarte [continuing]. On your question.
Senator Udall. If you could----
Ms. Guilarte. Yes.
Senator Udall. If you could answer that for the record,
that would be terrific.
Ms. Guilarte. I will.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much.
Assistant Secretary Haverkamp, in 2013 President Obama
issued an Executive order on combating wildlife trafficking,
with some specific actions for the United States to take. Can
you describe in more detail what the United States is doing to
combat wildlife trafficking, and how the State Department is
working to address these efforts?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you very much, Senator Udall, for that
question.
Wildlife trafficking is a real scourge. And it is a
problem, not just for the obvious reasons of the elimination of
some iconic species, but it is also an economic problem for
countries that depend on tourism. It is a national security
problem because of the involvement of organized crime and
extreme elements. It is also clearly a biodiversity concern.
And it is, frankly, a health problem because of the potential
for these illegally traded species to transmit diseases that
affect people.
As you noted, the President has led this initiative.
Recently, an implementation plan was released, where the
Department of State, including the Bureau that I hope to lead,
has a key role, in partnership with the Department of Interior
and the Department of Justice. The focus that I would see
having under this initiative is especially in the areas of
public education, so that people are less likely to demand
these products, and in the areas of enforcement, as well.
Enforcement is an especially important concern for OES. There
is a network of wildlife enforcement networks that OES has
helped establish around the world, and I would be very
interested in expanding that and helping to establish
additional networks around the globe.
Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
My home State of New Mexico is the world's--has the world's
first commercial spaceport and two national laboratories. So,
my State appreciates the role of science--that science and
technology play in protecting American security and providing
economic opportunities. What are OES's main priorities with
regards to space policy and science and technology cooperation?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you for that question.
In the area of space, in particular, the President, in
2010, produced a national space policy; and OES's work is
consistent with and in furtherance of that policy. Key among
that is the promotion of commercial space activities, including
the work on Spaceport America that could contribute to
expanding the opportunities for space transportation.
Also, OES has an important diplomatic role in working with
other countries to do things such as address space debris so
that it is safer to have increased space travel, working, as I
said, in expanding the opportunities for commercial use of
space and also working with other countries on things like the
sustained funding of the International Space Station, that sort
of thing. But, very much the role of the commercial entities,
like Spaceport America, is something that we would like to see
more of.
Senator Udall. Yes, I appreciate that answer.
Executive Director Occomy, it is my understanding that, in
2013, the African Development Bank approved a new 10-year
strategy which will focus on economic growth plus operational
priorities, including infrastructure development, regional
integration, private-sector development, governments and--
governance and accountability, and skills and technology. How
would you assess the strategy?
Ms. Occomy. Thank you, Ranking Member Udall, for that
question.
I understand that the strategy is going along. One thing
that I would say is that the African Development Bank has a
strong partnership with the United States. And part of carrying
out its strategy is actually to support the United States with
key initiatives, such as the Power Africa Initiative. The Power
Africa Initiative is designed to increase electricity access
across Africa, which is a key priority for the African
Development Bank, and it is a key directive, in terms of
implementing one of the core parts of the strategy.
Again, if confirmed, I will make every effort to work with
the African Development Bank to effectively implement its
strategy and to make sure that the elements and the initiatives
that are implemented are in line with U.S. interests,
particularly U.S. economic and security interests in Africa.
Senator Udall. Appreciate that answer.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Senator Gardner.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thanks for
holding this hearing today. And thanks, to all the witnesses,
for being here, and your families, as well. Thank you for your
willingness to serve this country.
To Mr. Egan, just a couple of quick questions. Last week,
we had a hearing before the East Asia Subcommittee, which also
now addresses cyber issues. So, just a couple of questions on
cyber. How do you envision your office interacting with Chris
Painter's office as the Coordinator for Cyber Issues?
Mr. Egan. Thank you, Senator.
I think that the issues of cybersecurity, cyber defense,
are increasingly important, both as a policy matter--as you
know, Chris Painter's office is deeply involved in
international fora related to those issues--but also as a legal
matter. I think you can look back to some remarks that my
predecessor--hopeful predecessor--the Legal Adviser, Harold
Koh, gave in 2012, where he kind of laid out the framework for
how we would think about cyber activities from a international
legal perspective. And I would anticipate, if I were confirmed
by this committee and by the Congress, working very closely
with Chris--and others at the State Department--to help further
develop those rules in the interests of our own national
security.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
And the Sony cyber attack carried out by North Korea was
described by the President as an act of cyber vandalism and not
cyber terrorism. In your legal opinion, where do you cross the
line between cyber vandalism and cyber terrorism?
Mr. Egan. Thank you, Senator.
An important legal question that came up in the context--
would come up in the context of Sony or some future event is
whether we would consider an act in cyber space a use of force,
where the responses to use of force would apply. And
considering a question such as that, I think we would look to
the effects of the act. Did it result in death, destruction of
significant amounts of property, and other similarly serious
acts? I think it is hard to kind of speculate in the abstract,
but those are the types of factors that I would anticipate
looking to in addressing a question like yours.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
And, to Ms. Haverkamp, the United States assumed the
chairmanship of the Arctic Council in 2015. How do you assess
our viability in working effectively with Russia, given that
nation's aggression in Ukraine and increased military activity
in the Arctic?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you very much for that question,
Senator.
In the Arctic Council, this is an entity that the United
States helped create many years ago. It operates by consensus
among the countries that all have territory north of the Arctic
Circle. Russia has been a part of that process for a very long
time. And, while the United States has very significant
problems with some aspects--significant aspects of Russia's
policy, so far in the Arctic Council, their interests seem to
have been to work together with the other countries of that
region.
Senator Gardner. So, you do not, at this point, see
Russia's policies as an obstacle to United States Arctic
policies or objectives in the region?
Ms. Haverkamp. The agenda that the United States has put
forward for its chairmanship is one that the other countries
had to agree to by consensus. And so, Russia has joined that
consensus in the objectives of Arctic Ocean stewardship,
safety, and security; protecting the health and economic well-
being of the Arctic peoples; and addressing the concerns of
climate change in that region.
Senator Gardner. So, when it comes to the Arctic, Russia is
living by the terms of the agreement, or at least what we
believe the agreement to be?
Ms. Haverkamp. Well, the U.S. chairmanship just began last
month. And so, I think--my understanding is that people are
hopeful. But, it may be too early to tell.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
And I am going to--may need help with the last name. Is it
Mr. Sabharwal? Very good. One of the primary tasks facing the
International Monetary Fund is stabilizing the economies of two
European nations: Greece and Ukraine. The next 1.5 billion
dollar--billion Euro--excuse me--billion Euro payment from
Greece to the IMF next month--will Greece be able to make the
payment, or are we heading toward default?
Mr. Sabharwal. Thank you for the question, Senator Gardner.
As you know, when the IMF stepped into Greece, back in
2010, there was serious risk of contagion effect. And whilst
Greece perhaps is a small percentage, in terms of GDP, of the
European and the global economy, it was critical that it steps
in at that time, together with the other institutions, the
European Central Bank and the European Commission.
Greece was supposed to, and did, make a payment in full
last week. And thereby, this week--this actually opened the
doors for a new set of discussions later on, taking place this
week in Latvia, where we do not refer to them as a troika
anymore, because the Greeks do not like that word. We--the
institutions--the ECB, the European Commission, and the fund--
are discussing a way forward so that Greece is able to make the
payments, not just in June, but also in July and August. Of
course, I am not at the fund at this point, I am not in the
administration. But, from what I understand, the parties
intend, including Chancellor Merkel, who wishes that Greece
stays in the eurozone, the institutions, and, after, let us
say, about a month of pause in dialogue, everybody is back at
the table. So, we do believe there will be a constructive
resolution here.
Senator Gardner. Obviously, one of the other important
issues that--I mentioned Ukraine. Just yesterday, the United
States Government signed a $1 billion loan guarantee for
Ukraine. On March 11, the IMF approved a $17.5 billion loan
payment to assist the Government of Ukraine. Recently, I met
with Finance Minister Natalie Yuresko, and she had assured me
that Ukraine is on a path to economic reform that would satisfy
both the needs and requirements of the United States Government
and other international creditors.
Do you share in this view?
Mr. Sabharwal. Thank you for the question.
So, Ukraine and that part of the world is relatively close
to me, because I spent part of my life growing up there. And if
you think--wind the clock back 20 years, 23 years, to the
origin of Ukraine's independence, it really--what has happened,
one bad economic policy and one less-than-adequate government
followed another for 20-plus years. Actually, Natalie is
someone who, when I was at the EBRD, she was actually working
for one of the venture funds that we were supporting at the
time. So, it is great to see actually someone so knowledgeable
about the region coming from the private sector, being in the
position that she is right now.
To answer your question, the IMF had identified about a $40
billion need at Ukraine as a need to get into a financial and
stable footing. Part of that 17 and a half billion is coming
from the IMF; part of it from other institutions. And, of
course, there is kind of a debt overhang in Ukraine, which I
understand that the parties are in discussion as to how to
manage that. As long as those discussions are ongoing, the fund
will continue to be--proactively support Ukraine with its
program. From what I understand, there is actually a team on
the ground right now, a fund team on the ground. And the
initial indications are that--whilst the issues are difficult,
that the program is on track.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you, Senator Gardner.
Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, to all of our nominees. I wish you good speed in
your confirmation process.
I wanted to pick up where Senator Gardner left off, Mr.
Sabharwal, to talk a little bit more about Ukraine. I am glad
to know that you have some expertise, or at least some
familiarity, with the region.
So, you know, it is always struck me that our policy on
economic assistance to Ukraine is anchored in the theater of
the absurd. We are giving them loan guarantees, we are
partnering with the IMF and other creditors to extend loans
with fairly high spreads to them. This is in the midst of an
invasion of their country. We are forcing them to make very
painful--very necessary, but very painful reforms in exchange
for this money. It sort of strikes me as if your neighbor's
house is on fire, and, instead of just delivering them the
bucket of water, you sit and negotiate with them for a period
of hours on the terms for the repayment of that water, instead
of just putting the fire out.
And so, I wanted to talk to you for a moment about this
issue of debt reduction. Larry Summers just wrote a column, in
which he said that the case for debt reduction with respect to
Ukraine is, ``as strong as any I have encountered in the past
quarter century.'' And it strikes me as incredibly reasonable
that the United States should be playing a leading role in
working with Ukraine's creditors for a writedown of their debt,
given the fact that they are in the middle of a war in the
eastern section of their country, and that--they have, frankly,
undertaken reforms already that are quite impressive in scope
and dwarf reforms that have been undertaken in prior
administrations.
So, I just wanted to get your sense of what you thought the
importance of debt reduction was, as part of the strategy
moving forward for Ukraine, and what role you see United States
representation as part of the IMF infrastructure playing in
that conversation.
Mr. Sabharwal. Thank you for the question.
As I mentioned before, the identified gap of financing in
Ukraine, from what I understand, is around $40 billion. Part of
that is filled with the IMF facility of 17 and a half. And, in
that, about one-five--15 million--billion is to come from, let
us call it--whether it is a restructuring of the private-sector
debt, maybe lengthening the maturity, a combination, lowering
of interest rates. There could be a number of ways that the
Government of Ukraine can achieve that, vis-a-vis its private-
sector lenders.
I believe that the fund does not directly engage in the
negotiations between the Ukrainian Government and the private-
sector bondholders, but I do believe that the position of the
Treasury and the position of the fund would be an
encouragement--a strong encouragement of Ukrainian government
to be at the table, continue good-faith negotiations with the
private-sector lenders. And, whilst those are actually ongoing,
the fund can continue with its program and continue to fund
Ukraine as it tries to come out of its economic difficulties.
So, in summary, I would say the position would be of
support, both from the Treasury--significant support--and the
fund, but not a direct engagement of negotiations between two
parties.
Senator Murphy. Thank you for the answer to the question. I
mean, I do not think that Ukraine, at this point, is largely
the problem. My understanding is that it is the private
creditors that are, right now, refusing to engage in a
constructive process about debt reduction. And so, I would just
counsel for a--if that is, indeed, the policy, that the IMF and
our representation at the IMF is not going to get in the
business of trying to unmask the fact that many of these
creditors are refusing to engage in constructive conversations
about debt reduction, I would, frankly, hope that we would have
a little bit more active presence and participation, given that
it is our money at risk. The United States has made loan
guarantees. We have exposure here. And, to an even more
important degree, if we do not unravel the economic mess in
Ukraine, which I think debt reduction is a big part of, then
the world's security is at risk. That is not necessarily the
IMF's responsibility, but it is certainly a U.S. interest.
Mr. Sabharwal. Thank you very much, Senator.
I have taken note. And, if confirmed, I will take up the
matter within Treasury and at the fund, itself.
Senator Murphy. Mr. Egan, I just wanted to just build on
some questions you were getting from Senator Corker. As you
know, there is a deep disagreement between many of us in the
administration on this interpretation of whether the existing
AUMF covers ISIL. I certainly do not believe that it does. I
think it is a strain, a reach of pretty incredible proportions.
And part of our worry is that we are not sure where this
rationale ends, that if ISIL is included under the umbrella of
an authorization of al-Qaeda, then what about all of the other
groups that are, as we speak, pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda?
Does that mean that the 2001 AUMF lives on forever, in that any
group in any part of the country can find itself now a subject
of U.S. force simply because it has aligned itself with ISIS?
Can you share a little bit as to what you believe the tests
are right now as to how this new doctrine of interpretation
that the administration is using of the 2001 AUMF plays out
with respect to these groups around the world who have pledged
allegiance to ISIL?
Mr. Egan. Yes. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
I think the administration's test as to whether a group is
an associated force of al-Qaeda is something that has been
talked about for a number of years. And that is, if a group is
an organized, armed group that has joined the fight against the
U.S. or coalition partners alongside of al-Qaeda, a group could
be considered an associated force of al-Qaeda.
You are correct that our view on ISIL is different.
Senator Murphy. But, this is different, because this is not
an associated force of al-Qaeda. This is now an associated
force of ISIS.
Mr. Egan. The way that I would think about it, at least, is
that they are a successor to Al Qaeda in Iraq. They are, in
fact, the group that was formerly known as Al Qaeda in Iraq,
which is what our intelligence community would say. They are,
in fact, al-Qaeda's longest affiliate, going back to the early
2000s. And I think if you look at the facts behind ISIS and
their history, ISIL--ISIS and their history, they are probably
uniquely situated, and it is hard to see another group that
would fit the bill as they did, a group that we were fighting
against, going back several years, that continued to fight us,
that believes that they are the true successors to Osama bin
Laden. There just are not other groups out there that I am
aware of that would fit that bill.
Senator Murphy. And I would just hope that you will help us
understand some of the terminology that is being used today. In
the administration's proposed AUMF, they suggest that
``associated forces'' will be those that are engaged in
hostilities against the United States or our coalition
partners. Well, because ISIS now has, arguably, roots in almost
every corner of the world, and we have coalition partners in
every corner of the world, you can see a definition by which
even Boko Haram, if it is engaged in hostilities against a
group that--against a country which is a coalition partner, now
all of a sudden falls under an authorization that was intended
for a very different group.
And so, I think many of us are worried about the--not the
2000 AUMF authorization, in and of itself, but this new
authorization that is proposed, and how big and unwieldy it
could become. I look forward to working with you on some of
those very tricky questions.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you very much, Senator Murphy.
Just to follow up, Mr. Egan, a couple of things, in terms
of treaties, executive actions, where it all fits in. The
Senate has passed a bipartisan piece of legislation for the
Iranian deal to make sure that the Senate has an opportunity to
review that, not at the treaty level, which is a 67, but as a--
more of a disapproval motion, and then whether that is vetoed.
So, how do you see these differences, in terms of treaty and
just a disapproval motion? And what qualifies for what?
Mr. Egan. Thank you for your question, Mr. Chairman.
If I were confirmed, I think working with this committee on
issues involving treaties, executive agreements, political
commitments is one of what I would consider to be my most
important responsibilities. I think that administrations from
both parties have had a history of working with the Congress to
identify agreements that would be treaties subject to the
treaty clause in the constitution, other agreements that would
be Executive agreements, and then political commitments of the
type that the Iran deal is intended to be. And so, working
through the nuances and making sure that this committee and the
Congress understands how the administration is approaching a
particular negotiation, I think, is one of the more important
responsibilities I would take on if I were confirmed as Legal
Adviser.
Senator Barrasso. Yes. I mean, because the United States
and other nations are attempting to negotiate an agreement on
international climate later this year. And so, I wonder what
conditions or provisions in a new climate change agreement
would require advice and consent of the Senate, which would
not, and, you know, will you commit to sending any new
agreement for the Senate for advise and consent?
Mr. Egan. Senator, I think each agreement would have to be
looked at in each negotiation kind of on its facts. And I think
Secretary Kerry, in his testimony before this committee, has
identified a number of the facts that would be relevant to
whether an agreement should be considered a treaty, an
Executive agreement, or a nonbinding commitment. And I am not
intimately familiar with the facts behind the climate
negotiations, but I would commit to working with this committee
to make sure that you were informed of the status of those
discussions so that you could have an informed view on the
nature of the arrangement being negotiated.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ms. Haverkamp, the United States is currently participating
in this climate negotiation, or will be soon, with the goal of
reaching an agreement at the end of the year. Will you commit
to ensuring that any new agreement the administration reaches
internationally on climate change is brought to the Senate for
advise and consent?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chairman.
My understanding of the status of the negotiations is that
they are still at a fairly early stage, and focused primarily
on what the substance of the agreement would be, and not yet
really on the form. So, it is too early, I think, to say what
might happen.
I do know that the mandate that the countries are
negotiating under is one that creates a real opportunity for
the United States, which is to create an agreement that
involves contributions from all countries, not just the
developed countries, which has been the case in the past. But,
what form those contributions or commitments might take is
something that has not yet been decided. The mandate gives
countries a lot of flexibility in what type of decisions or
agreements might come out of Paris.
Senator Barrasso. And then, what role would you personally
be playing in these negotiations, if you are confirmed, in
terms of the climate change conference and the negotiations?
Ms. Haverkamp. As I believe you know, the lead for the U.N.
climate negotiations at the Department of State is the Special
Envoy, Todd Stern. And his office leads those negotiations. I
would anticipate cooperating and collaborating with his
office----
Senator Barrasso. But, would he report to you? I mean, I am
trying to get the pecking order.
Ms. Haverkamp. He reports to Secretary Kerry.
Senator Barrasso. And you are not in that chain.
Ms. Haverkamp. Well, the----
Senator Barrasso. You would not be, if confirmed, in the
chain.
Ms. Haverkamp [continuing]. The arrangement is that there
is a significant office within the Bureau that I would head,
which is the Office of Global Change, and which provides a lot
of the staff support, you might even say ``the backbone'' of
technical expertise, to the Special Envoy's team. And there is
a role that that group plays, in terms of the negotiations, in
terms of technical expertise, and also in overseeing some of
the adaptation foreign assistance funding that the Department
provides.
Senator Barrasso. It seems to me there is some duplication
of climate change resources at the State Department. And so, I
would ask, Are you committed to eliminating duplication and
redundancies at the State Department? You know, I am trying to
figure out, How does the Office of Climate Change in the Bureau
interact with the Office of Special Climate Envoy? It does
seem, I think, to a lot of taxpayers, as duplicate use of
taxpayer dollars, at this point.
Ms. Haverkamp. Senator, I certainly embrace the idea of the
Department using taxpayer dollars efficiently and effectively.
And, if I am confirmed, I would take a very close look at that.
Looking more broadly at the question of Special
Representatives and Special Envoys, it does seem that there are
certainly times when an issue is of a certain priority or
urgency, such as the U.S. chairmanship of the Arctic Council,
which calls for bringing in a special office to lead that
particular effort. Another example is the Ebola crisis, where
the State Department created a Special Representative for
Ebola, and that office has just recently been dismantled, and
then some of that work brought back to OES.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ms. Occomy, the African Development Bank's goal is to
promote economic growth, reduce poverty in 53 African member
countries. The U.S. Director should support, I believe, low-
cost, dependable energy sources as a means to help countries
spur economic growth. Now, these nations include some of the
poorest countries in the world. African countries have
substantial fossil fuel resources, including oil, coal, and
natural gas. Do you believe the African Development Bank should
end all financing for projects dealing with fossil fuels?
Ms. Occomy. Thank you, Chairman, for that question.
As you know, Africa has vast needs. And promoting access to
affordable, reliable, efficient energy infrastructure and
resources is actually a major focus of the African Development
Bank, which includes projects related to coal, natural gas, and
oil. If confirmed, I would vote in favor of projects that are
consistent with U.S. policies and laws and are within the
African Development Bank's operating guidelines.
You know, what is really interesting is that the
administration's policies recognize the unique needs of the
poorest countries, including those in African, and, as such,
supports the United States to be in favor of coal power
generation plant projects, but under certain conditions
whereby, you know, those projects promote the most efficient
coal technologies and--in the poorest countries without, you
know, economically viable alternatives.
So, in essence, you know, the African Development Bank has
been long committed to addressing the electricity access needs
across African. And a demonstration of that is the Bank's
strong collaboration with the United States in the Power Africa
Initiative. So, if confirmed, I will continue to support and to
promote the strong collaboration between the United States and
the African Development Bank, and in the consideration of, you
know, reliable, affordable energy infrastructure and services
projects to help address the electricity needs across Africa,
particularly sub-Saharan Africa.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Senator Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
So, Mr. Egan, can you outline what you do believe are the
limits--again, in terms of the use of the Authorization for the
Use of Military Force that was passed in 2001, in terms of the
President's inherent ability to use it to engage affiliates of
ISIS, ISIL, or other groups? I mean, Senator Murphy asked about
Boko Haram. Can you envision a situation where that would be
something that could be justified as having been authorized
under the 2001 authorization?
Mr. Egan. Thank you, Senator.
I think the limits of the existing 2001 authorization are
that it authorizes the use of military force against al-Qaeda,
the Taliban, and their associated forces. And I think
``associated forces'' is an important limitation. It is not
enough for a group to declare their affiliation with al-Qaeda
in order to be covered by the authorization. They actually have
to be, in international law terms, a cobelligerent with al-
Qaeda. They----
Senator Markey. What is the phrase?
Mr. Egan. A cobelligerent, sir. So, somebody who, for
example, posts on the Internet their agreement with al-Qaeda,
that would not, in and of itself, be enough to come within the
AUMF. But, there has to be some degree of organizational
affiliation between the two groups for the 2001 AUMF to apply.
Senator Markey. Okay. Are there any geographical limits?
Mr. Egan. No, Senator, not in the existing 2001 AUMF.
Senator Markey. Yes. So, any group that could meet the test
that you laid out, regardless of their geographical proximity
to Afghanistan, could, in fact, be covered, in terms of the
deployment of U.S. forces.
Mr. Egan. I think that that is true, Senator, although I
think that, if you look at the administration's history of its
reliance on the 2001 AUMF, the groups against whom we have used
that authority have been fairly limited, although I recognize
this committee's and the Congress' questions about our use of
the authority against ISIL.
Senator Markey. Yes.
So, Ms. Haverkamp, on climate change, I think there is big
breakthrough that occurred between this administration and
China. And I give you a lot of credit for that. Just a huge
moment in history. As you are looking forward to Paris, do you
see some additional opportunities to foster cooperation in a
way that can advance our goals of reducing the dangerous
greenhouse gases that are being sent up into the atmosphere?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you very much for that question,
Senator.
While much of the attention is focused on Paris, and that
is a very important forum for making advances on climate
change, there are other fora where progress can and needs to be
made. One very important one this year is the Montreal
Protocol, where there has been significant progress recently on
countries agreeing to try to address HFCs, which is a potent
greenhouse gas, in that forum. And if I were confirmed, I would
want very much to be part of the effort to get agreement by the
end of this year, in the Montreal Protocol, on adding HFCs to
its mandate and working toward the elimination of them.
Senator Markey. Secretary Kerry has done a great job in
focusing upon illegal fishing. How do you see your role in
furthering that agenda to make sure that we are stamping out
illegal fishing around the world?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you for asking. That is a really
important part of the mandate of the State Department and the
responsibilities of the Bureau I would hope to lead.
As you know well, something like a billion people around
the world depend on the oceans for the protein in their diets.
And many, many people depend on the fishing industry for their
livelihoods. Illegal, unreported, unregulated fishing is a very
big problem. And there is a Presidential task force on that,
which the State Department cochairs with NOAA. I would hope
very much to be part of the efforts of implementing the work of
that task force, which includes ramping up enforcement,
educating people, expanding partnerships with other countries,
and developing, for the United States, a traceability program.
Along those lines, I know the folks at the State Department
are very pleased that this committee gave its advice and
consent to the Port State Measures Agreement, which is an
important aspect of addressing this problem. And I understand
that tomorrow there may even be markup of implementing
legislation for that and other fisheries agreements, which I
very much consider important progress in addressing these
issues. And, if confirmed, I would very much want to make that
one of my priorities.
Senator Markey. Yes. And, you know, on the question of
exportation of American natural gas, there is no question that
the more of that that we do is--the harder it is going to be to
meet our greenhouse gas objectives in the United States,
because it is going to drive up the price of natural gas here
and, as a result, make coal much more affordable here in the
United States for utilities to be burning. So, it is going to
run totally contrary to the goals that we are going to set,
going forward. The Energy Information Agency said that there
could be a 50-percent rise in the price of natural gas here
domestically if we export all the natural gas that the
Department of Energy is now approving for its export. So, that
is just going to really drive a stake into our ability to be
able to meet the promises that we are going to be making.
And sometimes I think we forget that we should also be
focusing on exporting of energy efficiency technologies
overseas. The Ukraine, for example, is the second least
efficient energy-efficient country in the world. Only
Uzbekistan is less energy efficient. So, if they just reached
Poland's level of efficiency, they would back out all of their
imported natural gas. And I think sometimes we do a disservice
to these countries by not first focusing upon energy efficiency
and promising them the larger projects that ignore the easy
gains that they can make if they, in fact, use energy
efficiency in a much more expansive way.
So, I thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
Senator Barrasso. Well, thank you very much, Senator
Markey.
Ms. Haverkamp, November 30, 2012, you wrote a blog at the
Environmental Defense Fund stating, ``The agriculture sector,
itself, contributes a substantial share of the emissions that
cause climate change, often in the form of powerful greenhouse
gases like methane and nitrous oxide.'' In the same blog, you
say, ``The major emitters' paucity of vision, ambition, and
urgency, has brought us to the brink of catastrophe.''
How has the American farmers, who you state are responsible
for, ``a substantial share of the emissions that cause climate
change'' brought us, as you say, ``to the brink of
catastrophe''?
Ms. Haverkamp. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The factors that contribute to climate change are many.
But, the land-use sector is a major contributor, especially in
developing countries. And that includes deforestation, it
includes overuse of fertilizers, it includes, frankly, a fair
amount of methane from rice production around the world. So, I
think that that is a concern that is a worldwide concern, not
just one that would affect American farmers. And when I was at
Environmental Defense Fund, one of the things I worked on was
addressing deforestation and helping rural farmers in India and
Vietnam with finding low-carbon ways to improve their
agricultural practices.
Senator Barrasso. So, from 2011 to 2014, you were director
of the International Climate Program at the Environmental
Defense Fund. While in that position, you wrote another blog
post stating, ``One of Doha's notable developments was that,
for the first time, the talks broached the subject of
compensation from rich countries for the loss and damage
incurred by the most vulnerable nations due to climate
change.'' You went on to say, ``The sobering reality is that
grappling with the dangerous effects of climate change can no
longer be put off to some future date. They are already
inflicting harm.''
So, do you believe U.S. taxpayers owe millions of dollars,
if not more, in climate reparations to small developing
nations?
Ms. Haverkamp. No, Senator, I do not. And the issue of loss
and damage in the U.N. climate negotiations is one that does
not need to be put in that box. And my understanding, though I
am not close to the negotiations currently, is that it is in
the adaptation context, in helping countries to adapt to
significant effects of climate change that are coming, and some
of which are already here.
Senator Barrasso. But, when you said, ``The dangerous
effects of climate change can no longer be put off. They are
inflicting harm.'' You blame the agriculture sector,
contributing a substantial share of the emissions. So, you talk
about rich countries, like the United States, owing money to
developing countries, in the form of climate reparations. So, a
good--it sounds like you believe American agriculture is
partially to blame for climate change. As the poultry growers
in Delaware, cotton farmers, Tennessee, cattle ranchers in
Wyoming--are they responsible? Do they owe money for the loss
and damage that they have, under, you know, your phraseology,
``inflicted on developing nations'' because of climate change?
Ms. Haverkamp. Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that owing
reparations is part of what I was talking about. I believe that
the agricultural sector can contribute in a very positive way
to addressing climate change. And there are many opportunities,
frankly, to help agriculture farm more efficiently if they are
able to use more targeted fertilizer or, for example, again,
with rice, use less water, so that there is less methane
produced from the rotting of the submerged vegetation. I think
that one reason that climate change is a profound challenge is
that there are so many different contributions to the problem,
and there are not easy solutions. It is something that requires
a lot of effort and contributions from everyone
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Ms. Occomy, in your testimony, you committed to being a
good steward of U.S. financial contributions to the bank. And
we agree. It is critically important U.S. resources are used in
a responsible and efficient manner. So, do you believe
requiring borrowers--people that come to the bank to borrow
money--that they accept higher-cost energy projects, in terms
of only being able to borrow for costs for energy projects that
are approved by some people that have a specific position, from
a climate change standpoint--do you believe requiring borrowers
to accept high-cost energy projects is a responsible use of
taxpayer dollars when affordable, reliable alternatives are
readily available?
Ms. Occomy. Thank you, Chairman Barrasso, for that
question.
Again, you know, a major focus of the work of the African
Development Bank is to promote access to modern, reliable,
efficient energy services and infrastructure.
Senator Barrasso. Even if it is more expensive. I mean,
that is the question. Is modern, newer, not been around for
thousands of years under the ground, but something built up
and----
Ms. Occomy. Absolutely. When a project comes before us to
review and to consider the U.S.'s determination as to whether
to support that project, it is important to look actually at
the full lifecycle costs. Sometimes there may be higher costs
up front relating to implementing a modern, more efficient form
of energy. But, over the lifecycle of the project, it should
not be higher. So, I think it is important, not necessary to
look just at the upfront investment costs, which seem to be
higher, but to look at the full lifecycle costs of the project
and to take that into consideration, and also to look at,
generally speaking, potential environmental and social costs
associated with not implementing a more modern, efficient,
reliable source of energy.
So, I think it is important, you know, not just to look
solely at perhaps higher costs up front, but to look at the
full lifecycle costs of the project, the environmental, social
costs, and so forth.
Senator Barrasso. So, the social cost of carbon, the
lifecycle of the project--in my multiple trips to Africa,
people wanted affordable--first, they wanted electricity. They
wanted electricity. I mean, it is an astonishing thing, as you
travel to these areas that just completely go dark at night,
due to lack of electricity. They want affordable energy today.
And I do not think any of the many, many people I visited in so
many communities give any consideration to the lifecycle cost
of the project or the social cost of the project. And they
believe--and I agree with them--that their lives could be made
so much better with available electricity, affordable
electricity today.
And I just--so, I think about this, and I think that--you
know, should the economic feasibility, the potential to provide
maximum access to energy with maximum efficiency, not be the
biggest factors when evaluating projects to get electricity
that is affordable to those people today? Is that not the thing
that could actually help so many people worldwide, in terms of
the long-term--you talk about lifecycle--I am talking about
their life, that lifecycle of that individual, of that human
being, who views the whole thing as their lifecycle, not some
investment project lifecycle.
Ms. Occomy. Thank you, Chairman.
You know, as I stated earlier, the administration's
policies do recognize that there are unique needs for the
poorest countries, particularly those in Africa. And taking
that into consideration, under certain administration policies,
the United States can vote in favor of coal power generation
plants if it is--under certain conditions, if the project
promotes more efficient coal technologies and there is no other
economically viable alternative.
So, I think the criterion really is, you know, looking at
all of the alternative approaches to address the energy needs,
particularly for the poorest countries, and then to figure out,
What is the most economically viable alternative to address
that need? So----
But, the United States can support coal projects in
consideration of the current policies.
Senator Barrasso. You know, I just recently learned that
the African Development Bank--because you mentioned the word
``voting'' and how you can vote--and I learned that the bank is
actually having elections for the new president, I think, in a
couple of weeks. I do not even know how that is structured.
Could you kind of run through that for me?
Ms. Occomy. Yes. Thank you for raising that point.
I welcome the African Development Bank's open, transparent,
merit-based process for selecting a president. The bank will be
selecting a president on May 28 at its annual meeting of eight
candidates who have been put forth by their countries. I am not
aware of who the United States is supporting of the eight
candidates. But, if confirmed, I look forward to working with
the newly elected president to implement his or her's vision
for the African Development Bank, going forward.
Senator Barrasso. So, is it an annual--you said at their
annual meeting they are going to do this, of the eight
candidates. Is it for a 1-year term, and they are just trying
to figure out how----
Ms. Occomy. Right. Oh, I am sorry.
Senator Barrasso [continuing]. How we decide how that----
Ms. Occomy. Right.
Senator Barrasso [continuing]. How we vote for----
Ms. Occomy. Right. So, at the annual meeting, the president
is elected. And this is after a very deliberative process,
where the candidates have put forth their positions at
different venues. In fact, they were here at the spring
meetings for the World Bank and the IMF, and there was a side
meeting where they presented their candidacies and agent--you
know, agendas for those in the international development
community. So, in general, it is a very open, you know,
transparent, merit-based process.
The--excuse me--the term of the president, I believe, is
for 4 years. And that term can be--he can--he or she----
Senator Barrasso. Right.
Ms. Occomy [continuing]. Can be reelected----
Senator Barrasso. Run for----
Ms. Occomy [continuing]. For another term.
Senator Barrasso. Yes.
Ms. Occomy. And so, President Kaberuka, the end of his
second term----
Senator Barrasso. Oh, so--that is right, it is----
Ms. Occomy [continuing]. Is coming up.
Senator Barrasso [continuing]. Open now to----
Ms. Occomy. And so, now that is why----
Senator Barrasso [continuing]. Eight people.
Ms. Occomy [continuing]. They are electing a new president.
Senator Barrasso. Good.
Thank you. Thank you. That helps clarify.
Mr. Sabharwal, a quick question for you. I think Senator
Gardner asked you about Greece being able to make the recent
750 million euro payment, almost defaulted. They have another
payment due in June. You know, I would ask if you would talk a
little bit more about that, what the impact of a default would
be, how effective this International Monetary Fund's program is
in Greece, and what is the argument for having the IMF continue
to loan more money to Greece, you know, given the situation.
Mr. Sabharwal. Okay. Thank you for the question, Mr.
Chairman. So, there are multiple questions there.
First of all, the significance of putting this policy in
place was, of course, the contagion effect that was going to be
significantly affecting the eurozone, which, in turn, as one of
our major trading partners, going to affect the U.S. economy.
The second point I would make, that, as a percentage of
total financing from the institutions, the IMF's share has
actually decreased from about 26 percent, when it was put in
place, to about 17 percent today. That is because of the
different, kind of, repayment terms that there are between the
IMF and the other institutions that are part of the package,
the ECP and the European Commission.
We are encouraged that the discussions and negotiations are
ongoing between the other parties. There was a period when
there were no discussions, no constructive dialogue. But, we
think that that period has passed. We are looking at meetings
taking place later on this week in Latvia on the matter, and we
believe that a resolution will be reached that will enable
Greece to pay its obligations to the IMF as they come due. The
IMF has really never lost money, so it has always been in a
position that perhaps some nations have fallen into arrears for
a period of time--for instance, Liberia--but they have
recovered very successfully. So, we are fully confident that
the discussions between the institutions and Greece will be
successful.
Senator Barrasso. Thank you.
Senator Udall, additional questions?
Senator Udall. I would submit most of my--the rest of my
questions for the record and just thank the witnesses, and
thank their families for the very supportive role that they
play.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Barrasso. And you make an excellent point there.
We thank each of you for your testimony, your willingness
to serve our Nation. It is my hope each of you will be
dedicated to advancing American interests all across the globe.
Members of the committee will have an opportunity, until
the close of business on Thursday the 21st, to submit questions
for the record. We ask you try to respond promptly in writing
to the committee in order your nomination to be considered in a
timely manner.
Thank you very much. Congratulations, again.
Hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:20 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Mileydi Guilarte, Nominated to be U.S. Alternate Executive
Director of the Inter-Ameriocan Development Bank, to Questions from
Members of the Committee
director-designate guilarte's responses
to questions from senator barrasso
Question. What are the Inter-American Development Bank's relative
strengths compared to the other international financial institutions?
In what areas does the Inter-American Development Bank have a
comparative advantage?
Answer. As a regional development bank, the Inter-American
Development Bank (IDB) has a sole focus on Latin America and the
Caribbean, and its breadth and depth of knowledge of the economic,
social, and political dynamics of the region and its borrowing member
countries is its main relative strength. It has offices in every one of
its borrowing member countries to ensure continuous policy dialogue and
supervision of its projects. The IDB has developed broad-based
sectoral/thematic comparative advantage in infrastructure, particularly
energy; citizen security; and social sector development, including
conditional cash transfer programs. The IDB also effectively works
across countries on regional initiatives, including customs and trade
facilitation, and transport and energy infrastructure.
Question. In January 2015, Vice President Biden stated, ``An
integrated North America, working to promote energy security beyond our
borders can be a major asset for the entire hemisphere. And it's
profoundly in the self-interest of the United States to see the
Caribbean countries succeed as prosperous, secure, energy-independent
neighbors.''
How can the Inter-American Development Bank help support
greater regional interconnection of energy markets and
infrastructure?
Answer. The IDB has a number of ongoing programs that actively
support greater regional interconnection of energy markets and energy
infrastructure investment. With significant assistance from the IDB
over many years, Central American governments recently succeeded in
integrating their electricity markets through an initiative known as
the Central American Electrical Interconnection System (SIEPAC). To
achieve this success, the IDB, in cooperation with the United States,
facilitated a dialogue in 2013 among Central American governments that
resulted in a ministerial declaration outlining the governments'
commitment to regional energy trade. And in November 2014, the Central
American governments supported a Mesoamerican Energy Investment Summit
in Guatemala that drew over 500 participants to highlight the
investment potential in the region and to celebrate the completion of
the SIEPAC transmission line. The IDB has also provided direct
financing totaling $253.5 million and an additional $25 million in
technical assistance to support Central America's energy infrastructure
and to facilitate creating the regional energy market.
In addition to Central America, the IDB has been working with
Andean countries on the Andean regional electric integration process.
The IDB has provided a variety of technical assistance to help in this
effort and is the technical secretary of the Andean Electrical
Interconnection System (SINEA).
The IDB has done considerable work with the Caribbean to assess the
potential of regional energy markets, including how best to develop and
use sustainable sources of energy, such as natural gas and renewable
energy sources.
Question. What steps is the Inter-American Development Bank
currently taking to provide the region with energy security and
diversification through natural gas?
Answer. The IDB is committed to financing reliable, low-cost
generation in Latin America and the Caribbean. The IDB is helping many
clients develop favorable policy and regulatory frameworks for energy
access, in addition to support for the private sector to increase the
use of efficient technologies.
Now that the SIEPAC is complete, thanks in large part to the
efforts of the IDB, Central American economies are looking to introduce
natural gas to substitute for heavy fuel and diesel generation in the
coming years. To support that effort, the IDB has completed
prefeasibility studies for natural gas in power generation in both
Central America and the Caribbean, and is supporting analysis of some
natural gas projects, including the proposed Mexican natural gas
pipeline project with El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala.
Question. Do you believe that American liquefied natural gas
exports would improve energy diversification in the Western Hemisphere
and promote economic growth in the region?
Answer. Natural gas can be a useful part of a country's or region's
energy diversification strategy like renewables and energy efficiency.
As is the case for any energy infrastructure project, mobilizing the
finance required to introduce natural gas into a given country requires
open, transparent, and stable investment climates and appropriate
legal, policy, and regulatory frameworks.
Question. What specific actions is the U.S. Government taking to
work with the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank, the
Organization of American States and American companies in coordinating
efforts on cross-border trade in electricity, regional interconnection,
and energy development?
Answer. Working with regional partners, including the IDB, the
World Bank, and the Organization of American States (OAS), the United
States is supporting the Connecting the Americas 2022 initiative
(Connect 2022) under the Energy and Climate Partnership of the Americas
(ECPA). The most recent meeting of the ECPA was hosted by the Mexican
Government on May 25-26, 2015. Connect 2022 seeks to achieve universal
access to electricity and create a business climate that accelerates
interconnection and renewable energy. Connect 2022 coordinates
technical assistance for regulatory and institutional reform, builds on
extensive bilateral and subregional government efforts to connect grids
and empower regional energy integration, supports IDB and World Bank
power sector programs, and catalyzes private investment to promote
greater access to cleaner and low-cost energy.
The administration's Central America strategy, as well as the
Northern Triangle's Alliance for Prosperity--for which the IDB serves
as Secretariat--also advance Central American energy security by
emphasizing energy sector reform and development. In addition,
President Obama, in his April 2015 visit to Panama for the Summit of
the Americas, launched a new Central American and Caribbean Energy
Security Task Force to help these smaller markets promote policies that
attract private investment in lower carbon power sources and reduce
their dependency on imported oil.
The U.S. Department of Commerce maintains an Office of Business
Liaison in the IDB to work with the American business community to
identify business opportunities, provide advice and counsel on
strategies for approaching those opportunities, and advocate before the
IDB and borrowing country governments on behalf of interested American
businesses.
The IDB also hosts the Americas Business Dialogue (ABD), which
serves as a platform for private sector entities in Latin America and
the Caribbean to engage with governments on potential reforms, and
which includes efforts to maximize the potential of the region's energy
market as one of its four areas of focus.
Question. In 2012, the United States joined leaders of the Western
Hemisphere in committing to an initiative called ``Connecting the
Americas 2022.'' The initiative aims to achieve universal access to
electricity through enhanced electrical interconnection by 2022.
What is the status of this initiative and what progress has
been made in reaching the initiative's goals?
Answer. Working with regional partners, including the IDB, the
World Bank, and the OAS, the United States is supporting the Connecting
the Americas 2022 initiative (Connect 2022) under the ECPA. The most
recent meeting of the ECPA was hosted by the Mexican Government on May
25-26, 2015. Connect 2022 seeks to achieve universal access to
electricity and create a business climate that accelerates
interconnection and renewable energy. Connect 2022 coordinates
technical assistance for regulatory and institutional reform, builds on
extensive bilateral and subregional government efforts to connect grids
and empower regional energy integration, supports IDB and World Bank
power sector programs, and catalyzes private investment to promote
greater access to cleaner and low-cost energy.
Significant process has been made in Central America, which has
been a leader in furthering the Connect 2022 efforts. SIEPAC and the
related regional transmission line, completed in September 2014, now
connects six Central American countries from Guatemala to Panama and
establishes a regional market.
In addition to Central America, the IDB and the United States have
been working with Andean countries on the Andean Regional electric
integration process. The IDB has provided a variety of technical
assistance to help in this effort and is the technical secretary of
SINEA.
Question. How is the Connecting the Americas 2022 complementing or
adding to the work being done at Inter-American Development Bank?
Answer. The IDB has been a key partner in the Connect 2022
initiative, providing complementary support to the efforts of the
United States. With significant assistance from the IDB over many
years, Central American governments recently succeeded in integrating
their electricity markets through the SIEPAC initiative. To achieve
this success, the IDB, in cooperation with the United States,
facilitated a dialogue in 2013 among Central American governments that
resulted in a ministerial declaration outlining the governments'
commitment to regional energy trade. And in November 2014, the Central
American governments supported a Mesoamerican Energy Investment Summit
in Guatemala that drew over 500 participants to highlight the
investment potential in the region and to celebrate the completion of
the SIEPAC transmission line. The IDB also has provided direct
financing totaling $253.5 million and an additional $25 million in
technical assistance to support Central America's energy infrastructure
and to facilitate creating the regional energy market.
In addition to Central America, the IDB has been working with
Andean countries on the Andean Regional electric integration process.
The IDB has provided a variety of technical assistance to help in this
effort and is the technical secretary of the SINEA.
The IDB has done considerable work with the Caribbean to assess the
potential of regional energy markets, including how best to develop and
use sustainable sources of energy such as natural gas and renewable
energy sources.
Question. What kind of technical assistance and capacity-building
programs is the United States providing to support the Connecting the
Americas 2022 in Central America, the Caribbean, and the Andean region?
Answer. In collaboration with the IDB, the State Department and
USAID are providing policy and technical assistance to improve regional
electricity market development and trade in Central America.
Additionally, the U.S. and Mexican Governments have been working with
Guatemala on plans to pass through Mexican electricity and gas to
benefit Central America as a whole.
In Chile and Peru, the State Department is working with utilities
to assess interconnection options in support of connecting the Chilean
and Andean electrical grids.
In the Caribbean, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency (USTDA) and
the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), in coordination
with the State Department, USAID, and the Department of Energy, are
launching a $20 million facility to encourage investment in clean
energy projects in the region. The facility will provide early-stage
funding to catalyze greater private and public sector investment in
clean energy projects.
Question. The United States is the largest contributor to the
Inter-American Development Bank. Regional developing countries are
required to have a controlling majority vote at the Bank. A March 2013
report by the Inter-American Development Bank's Office of Evaluation
and Oversight stated that the effectiveness of reforms has been
limited. The report found that, ``reforms face inherent tensions with
the demand-driven orientation of the Bank, and approaches are needed
that can help meaningfully identify where Bank capabilities and
borrower demand intersect.''
Please describe the steps you would take to improve the
effectiveness of the reforms.
Answer. If confirmed, I would work closely with IDB Management and
fellow Board members to follow up on the implementation of the
recommendations from the 2013 Office of Evaluation and Oversight Report
to improve and deepen the effectiveness of the reforms undertaken as
part of the Ninth General Capital Increase of the IDB. Some examples of
those reforms are the recently approved revision of the policy for the
Independent Consultation and Investigation Mechanism, the IDB's
grievance mechanism for people affected by IDB projects; the update of
the IDB's macroeconomic sustainability assessments; the IDB Governors'
approval of a reform to consolidate the IDB's private sector activities
within one entity; and improvements to IDB's framework for measuring
development effectiveness, including enhancing its project completion
reports and the guidelines for country strategies. If confirmed, I will
encourage the Office of Evaluation and Oversight to continue reporting
independently on the status of reforms and seek full implementation of
action plans from IDB Management to continue improving the
effectiveness of those reforms.
Question. What reforms would be your top priority at the Inter-
American Development Bank?
Answer. If confirmed, I would work to ensure that the consolidation
of the private sector activities of the IDB is implemented in a way
that enhances efficiency and improves development effectiveness. I
would promote sound use of financial resources, including through
adherence to capital adequacy policies and prudential limits. I would
also work to further the IDB's results focus to improve the impact of
IDB activities in addressing inequality and bolstering growth in a
region that is critical to the national and economic security of the
United States. Given the IDB's pivotal role as Secretariat for the
Northern Triangle's Alliance for Prosperity, I would also work to
ensure that U.S. national interests remain a priority through the
administration's Central America strategy.
Question. Do you believe meaningful reforms can take place while
borrower countries maintain a majority of the voting power?
Answer. Yes. I believe that a number of meaningful reforms have
already taken place at the IDB, particularly in the context of the
Ninth General Capital Increase. As the majority owners of the IDB, the
borrowing member countries have a strong interest in ensuring that the
IDB's resources are deployed effectively and efficiently to address the
challenges in the region. If confirmed, I will seek to work with all
shareholders, including the borrowing member countries, to further
implement and deepen the reform agenda at the IDB.
__________
Responses of Jennifer Ann Haverkamp, Nominated to be Assistant
Secretary of State for Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs, to Questions from Members of the Committee
assistant secretary-designate haverkamp's responses
to questions from senator barrasso
Question. Are you committed to eliminating duplication and
redundancies at the Department of State?
Answer. I strongly support using taxpayer funds in the most
effective and efficient manner. In properly managing the Department's
programs and resources, it is of fundamental importance to continually
look for and implement ways to improve the economy, efficiency, and
effectiveness of operations.
Question. In fiscal year 2014, what percentage of the work of the
Bureau of Oceans and International Environment and Scientific Affairs
involved international climate change? In fiscal year 2014, what
percentage of the Bureau's funding was spent on international climate
change programs?
Answer. My understanding is that approximately 14 percent of the
Bureau's salaries and operating expenses in fiscal year 2014 involved
international climate change. Approximately 78 percent of the Bureau's
Fiscal Year 2014 Economic Support Fund (ESF) resources were allocated
for adaptation, clean energy and sustainable landscapes programs.
Question. Please provide examples of specific projects funded by
the Bureau for adaptation, clean energy, and sustainable landscapes in
fiscal year 2014. What were the tangible results and impacts of the
funding?
Answer. In the case of adaptation, my understanding is that the OES
Bureau provides funding for two multilateral specialized adaptation
funds, the Least Developed Countries Fund (LDCF) and the Special
Climate Change Fund (SCCF), which support hard-won development gains in
the face of climate variability and change. Examples include:
In Nepal, the LDCF is providing community-based early flood
warning to nearly 32,000 vulnerable people and reducing the
risk of glacial lake outburst floods through artificial
drainage.
In Indonesia, the SCCF is strengthening the resilience of
40 rural communities by adjusting subsistence farming practices
to be more resilient to variable and extreme climatic
conditions and helping communities to improve water resources
in the face of projected changes in rainfall patterns.
In the Philippines, the SCCF is strengthening the
resilience of vulnerable farming communities by stimulating
private sector engagement in climate risk reduction, developing
Weather Index Based Insurance and financial literacy training
for farming households, preparing early warning system plans,
and conducting vulnerability adaptation assessments.
In the case of clean energy, my understanding is that, with $20
million the OES Bureau has provided to the U.S.-Africa Clean Energy
Finance Initiative (U.S.-ACEF), to date, OPIC and USTDA expect to
leverage a total of nearly $2 billion in investment to increase access
to clean energy for Africa. The U.S.-ACEF program is designed to help
promising clean energy projects develop into viable candidates for
financing by providing small amounts of early-stage funding for
essential inputs, such as technical and feasibility studies. U.S.-ACEF
serves a catalytic role to advance these projects and help attract far
larger levels of private sector follow-on investment, which can help to
fuel economic growth in the region while providing access to modern
clean energy services. For example, in Tanzania, $600,000 was made
available to a U.S. energy developer to help fund a feasibility study
which is expected to mobilize $139 million in capital for a 55-megawatt
solar photovoltaic project at the University of Dodoma (UDOM) campus.
In the case of sustainable landscapes, my understanding is that the
OES Bureau supports the SilvaCarbon program, a joint effort of eight
U.S. Government agencies that enables developing countries to better
understand and manage their forests by leveraging U.S. technical
expertise on forest and forest carbon mapping and monitoring. This
technical capacity provides an essential foundation to enable countries
to prioritize their efforts to preserve forests, reducing emissions
from deforestation and safeguarding other benefits like biodiversity
and water quality. With technical assistance from SilvaCarbon:
Ecuador has completed its first national forest inventory;
Colombia was able to generate estimates of forest cover
change annually for the first time;
Gabon has developed a draft national land-use plan; and
Peru finalized its first forest dynamics map, which
provides essential information needed to estimate forest cover
and deforestation rates.
Question. How does the Office of Climate Change in this Bureau
interact with the Office of the Special Climate Envoy Todd Stern? In
what areas is there overlap in responsibilities and duties?
Answer. My understanding is that the Special Envoy for Climate
Change leads the international climate change negotiations for the U.S.
Government and oversees policy aspects of international climate
activities in the State Department. The Special Envoy has an office
focused on high-level meetings, negotiations, and policymaking.
OES's Office of Global Change handles a large portfolio of issues.
In relation to the international climate change negotiations, the
office provides staff-level support for the Special Envoy and Deputy
Special Envoys. Its officers serve as working-level negotiators, and
the office provides staff support for high-level diplomatic meetings to
advance U.S. objectives. These distinct roles are complementary and I
understand that there is no duplication in duties between these
offices, which work closely together.
Question. Please describe the current staffing, resources, and
responsibilities of the Office of Climate Change. In addition, please
describe when the Office was created and under what statutory
authority.
Answer. At the present time, the Office of Global Change in the OES
Bureau has 18 permanent, full-time direct hire staff. It also has
nonpermanent positions, including six fellows and temporary staff, and
five contractors. The Office of Global Change provides staff-level
support and technical expertise for the Special Envoy and Deputy
Special Envoys in international negotiations related to climate change,
supports several international climate change initiatives, and oversees
implementation of OES programs related to climate change. The office
has expertise on issues such as climate change mitigation, adaptation,
sustainable landscapes, finance, science, and technology, as well as on
management of programs. The Office of Global Change was established in
1989 pursuant to constitutional and statutory authorities regarding
management of the day-to-day conduct of U.S. foreign relations.
Question. Please describe the current staffing, resources, and
responsibilities of the Office of the Special Climate Envoy. In
addition, please describe when the Office was created and under what
statutory authority.
Answer. The Special Envoy for Climate Change serves as the chief
U.S. negotiator under the United Nations Framework Convention on
Climate Change (UNFCCC), which was ratified by the United States on
October 15, 1992. In this role, he helps develop the administration's
international policy on climate, and represents the United States
internationally at the ministerial-level in all bilateral and
multilateral negotiations regarding climate change. Todd Stern was
appointed on January 26, 2009.
The Special Envoy's office was established under the constitutional
and statutory authorities regarding management of the day-to-day
conduct of U.S. foreign relations. The Special Envoy for Climate Change
and his immediate office were established to provide greater senior
level focus to ensure that the interests of the United States are
adequately protected, given the complex and high-level nature of the
international climate discussions.
The Special Envoy's office coordinates the deployment of federal
expertise and resources in the UNFCCC negotiating process, helping to
ensure the best possible outcomes for the range of U.S. stakeholders.
In addition to the Special Envoy, the office currently has seven full-
time staff and three contractors.
Question. The United States is currently participating in
international climate negotiations with the goal of reaching an
agreement by the end of the year.
What form of an international agreement is the United
States advocating for at the international climate change
negotiations?
Will the agreement be legally binding on the United States
and other countries, including funding commitments for any
provision contained within the agreement?
What kinds of agreements or commitments currently under
negotiation would require congressional action, such as the
advice and consent of the Senate, and what might not? Please
explain your reasoning.
Answer. A 2011 decision of the Parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted in Durban, South
Africa, launched a process to develop a ``protocol, another legal
instrument, or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention
applicable to all Parties. . . . ''
The Durban decision makes clear that the purpose of a future Paris
agreement is to further the objective of the Convention (i.e., to avoid
dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate), yet leaves the
Parties with substantial flexibility regarding its form and the legal
nature of its provisions.
It is my understanding that at this stage, the international
discussions are more focused on the substance of the agreement than on
issues related to its form, such as whether it should be a protocol or
whether particular provisions should be legally binding. The
administration has indicated that the United States seeks an agreement
that is ambitious in light of the climate challenge; that reflects
nationally determined mitigation efforts in line with national
circumstances and capabilities; that provides for accountability with
respect to such efforts; that takes account of evolving emissions and
economic trends; and that promotes adaptation by parties to climate
impacts.
Can the administration enter into a politically binding
international agreement without congressional approval?
Answer. I understand the term ``politically binding'' in your
question to refer to arrangements that do not give rise to legal
obligations under U.S. or international law. It is my understanding
that such nonbinding arrangements have been utilized by Presidents of
both parties throughout our history to address a range of diplomatic
and national security matters and do not require congressional
approval.
What state, local governing entity or community would not
be subject to a politically binding treaty?
Answer. I understand the term ``politically binding'' in your
question to refer to arrangements that do not give rise to legal
obligations under U.S. or international law. Accordingly, any such
nonbinding arrangements would create no legal obligations for any
state, local governing entity, or community.
How does the administration plan to legally commit to the
President's November 2014 pledge to cut U.S. greenhouse gas
emission to 26-28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025?
Answer. I understand that the administration does not intend to
legally commit the United States to the 26-28 percent target. Moreover,
I understand that the administration favors an approach to the Paris
agreement under which emissions targets are not legally binding.
Please describe any existing statutory authorities the
administration may expect to rely on to implement the Intended
Nationally Determined Contribution (INDC.) Does the
administration believe it has the full statutory authority to
implement its recently announced INDC now or will the
administration need Congress to provide additional authorities?
Answer. I understand that the administration carefully evaluated
available statutory authorities in the development of the INDC. My
understanding is that several U.S. laws, as well as existing and
proposed regulations thereunder, are relevant to the implementation of
the U.S. target, including the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 7401 et
seq.), the Energy Policy Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 13201 et seq.), and the
Energy Independence and Security Act (42 U.S.C. Sec. 17001 et seq.).
Since 2009, the United States has completed the following regulatory
actions:
Under the Clean Air Act, the United States Department of
Transportation and the United States Environmental Protection Agency
adopted fuel economy standards for light-duty vehicles for model years
2012-2025 and for heavy-duty vehicles for model years 2014-2018.
Under the Energy Policy Act and the Energy Independence and
Security Act, the United States Department of Energy has finalized
multiple measures addressing buildings sector emissions including
energy conservation standards for 29 categories of appliances and
equipment as well as a building code determination for commercial
buildings.
Under the Clean Air Act, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency has approved the use of specific alternatives to high-global
warming potential hydrofluorocarbons (high-GWP HFCs) in certain
applications through the Significant New Alternatives Policy program.
At this time:
Under the Clean Air Act, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency is moving to finalize by summer 2015 regulations to cut carbon
pollution from new and existing power plants.
Under the Clean Air Act, the United States Department of
Transportation and the United States Environmental Protection Agency
are moving to promulgate post-2018 fuel economy standards for heavy-
duty vehicles.
Under the Clean Air Act, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency is developing standards to address methane emissions from
landfills and the oil and gas sector.
Under the Clean Air Act, the United States Environmental Protection
Agency is moving to reduce the use and emissions of high-GWP HFCs
through the Significant New Alternatives Policy program.
Under the Energy Policy Act and the Energy Independence and
Security Act, the United States Department of Energy is continuing to
reduce buildings sector emissions including by promulgating energy
conservation standards for a broad range of appliances and equipment,
as well as a building code determination for residential buildings.
What was the process the administration used for
determining the U.S. commitment? What consultations and inputs
from Congress and the American public did the administration
seek when working to establish the U.S. commitment?
Answer. I understand that the administration undertook an
extensive, rigorous interagency process to identify and assess
potential emission reductions that are both achievable and cost
effective. This process examined options to reduce emissions of all
greenhouse gases in every economic sector through existing statutory
and executive authorities and voluntary programs.
It is my understanding that agencies responsible for implementing
these existing statutory and executive authorities and voluntary
programs have had wide ranging discussions with stakeholders from the
public, private and nonprofit sector, including formal and informal
consultations with Congress.
What role does the Bureau of Oceans and International
Environment and Scientific Affairs have in the international
climate change negotiations?
Answer. The Office of Global Change in the Bureau of Oceans and
International Environmental and Scientific Affairs handles a large
portfolio of issues. In relation to the international climate change
negotiations, the office provides staff-level support and technical
expertise for the Special Envoy and support for high-level diplomatic
meetings to advance U.S. objectives, and its staff serve as working-
level negotiators.
What role will you play in the negotiations? What specific
advice, analysis, information, and support is the Office of
Climate providing for the international climate negotiations?
Answer. It is my understanding that over the past 14 years, under
this administration and the Bush administration, the OES Assistant
Secretary did not play a direct, formal role in the international
climate change negotiations.
The Office of Global Change in the OES Bureau provides staff-level
support and technical expertise for the Special Envoy and Deputy
Special Envoy in the negotiations. That includes expertise on issues
such as climate change mitigation, adaptation, sustainable landscapes,
finance, science, and technology, as well as program management and
support for high-level diplomatic meetings. Office staff also serve as
working-level negotiators.
Question. In November 2014, President Obama announced a pledge of
$3 billion to create a brand new Global Climate Fund. His fiscal year
2016 budget request asks for $500 million to start funding that pledge.
What was the process the administration used for
determining the appropriate commitment to the Global Climate
Fund? What consultations did the administration have with
Congress on this commitment?
Answer. It is my understanding that the administration undertook an
interagency discussion among staff of the Department of Treasury,
Department of State, Office of Management and Budget and the National
Security Council to determine what the U.S. pledge should be as a good
base of funding in the Green Climate Fund's initial few years. The key
reference point was the Bush administration's $2 billion pledge to the
Climate Investment Funds (CIFs), which that administration had planned
to provide over a 3-year period. In light of a legislative requirement
related to a multiyear pledge, I understand that the administration
consulted with relevant House and Senate staff 10 days before the GCF
pledge was announced, and then met with staff on multiple other
occasions during those 10 days.
What impact evaluations have been completed on the previous
$2 billion in U.S. funding for international climate change
already provided to the Climate Investment Funds?
Answer. My understanding is that an independent evaluation of the
Climate Investment Funds (CIFs), carried out by the independent
evaluation departments of the multilateral development banks, was
released in June 2014 and is available at http://www.cifevaluation.org.
Because of the early stage of most CIF investments (many of which are
of very long duration), the evaluation focused more on institutional
issues such as the process for developing country investment plans.
Further CIF project-level evaluations will be conducted in the future.
Each multilateral development bank that participates in the CIFs is
including CIF programs or projects into their evaluation work program.
Funding is being set aside in the CIF budget to support impact
evaluations and other evaluation tools.
When will the Climate Investment Funds be closed down? What
will happen to the funding that remains or comes back into the
fund?
Answer. My understanding is that the Trust Fund Committees of the
Climate Investment Funds will make a decision in the future about the
sunset of the CIFs, and when not to accept new contributions into the
Funds. Then, once all contributions have been committed to projects, no
new projects will be approved. Because the Climate Investment Funds are
intended to sunset, my understanding is that financial reflows will
probably not be used to finance future projects.
Why is it responsible for the administration to recommend
closing down the current Climate Investment Funds and creating
a larger brand new Global Climate Fund if no evaluations have
been done on the impact and results of U.S. funding to the
current international climate change programs?
Answer. My understanding is that the administration supports having
a robust evaluation program for the CIFs in order to inform future
programs at the Green Climate Fund and elsewhere. An independent
evaluation of the CIFs was released in June 2014 and is available at
http://www.cifevaluation.org. Because of the early stage of most CIF
investments (many of which are of very long duration), this evaluation
focused more on institutional issues such as the process for developing
country investment plans. We expect that further CIF project-level
evaluations will be conducted in the future.
__________
Responses of Marcia Denise Occomy, Nominated to be U.S. Director of the
African Development Bank, to Questions from Members of the Committee
director-designate occomy's responses
to questions from senator barrasso
Question. Do you believe the African Development Bank should
equally support all types of energy resources in order to provide sub-
Saharan Africa with the electricity it needs to grow their way out of
poverty?
Answer. Facilitating energy access and energy security for the
people of Africa is a priority for the African Development Bank and the
United States. I understand that energy access is essential to
promoting the growth of African economies. If confirmed, I will be
committed to promoting energy access through an appropriate mix of
energy resources consistent with U.S. laws and policies and the African
Development Bank's own operating guidelines and policies.
Question. When reviewing projects at the African Development Bank,
what criterion is used in determining whether the United States will
support the project?
Answer. In reviewing projects at the African Development Bank
(AfDB), the United States takes into account a range of different
factors to determine whether or not to support a specific project.
These factors include the degree to which the project will support a
country's efforts to reduce poverty, whether the project is well-
designed and mitigates foreseeable risks, whether the project is as
sustainable (financially and economically) as possible, and whether the
project meets both the AfDB's policies and U.S. legislative provisions.
Question. Do you believe economic feasibility and the potential to
provide maximum access to energy with maximum efficiency must be the
biggest factors when evaluating projects?
Answer. Economic feasibility and the degree to which a project
increases energy access are important, but not the only factors in
evaluating energy projects. The design of effective energy projects
will also take into account other factors, such as improving the long-
term financial sustainability of the country's energy sector; reducing
the potential for corruption in the project; and mitigating the
environmental, health, and social impacts of the project.
Question. Coal provides a low cost and reliable energy source which
is important to countries looking for assistance in poverty alleviation
and economic development. Do you agree with this statement? If not, why
not?
Answer. The U.S. Government is committed to providing energy access
and energy security to people around the globe as an important element
of economic development. In the poorest countries, where energy needs
are often the greatest, I understand that the President's Climate
Action Plan allows for support for new coal power-generation projects
under certain conditions that focus on promoting the most efficient
coal technologies and where no other economically viable alternative
exists. In wealthier countries, the U.S. may support new coal-fired
power projects that deploy carbon capture and sequestration (CCS)
technologies.
Question. Please list and provide information on all the countries
in the African Development Bank that have oil, natural gas, and coal
resources.
Answer. According to the latest data available from the Energy
Information Agency at the Department of Energy, the African Development
Bank's regional member countries with the largest reserves of oil are
Libya, Nigeria, Algeria, and Angola. The largest proved reserves of
natural gas are in Nigeria, Algeria, Mozambique, Egypt, Libya, and
Angola. The largest recoverable reserves of coal are in South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Mozambique, Tanzania, and Nigeria. Complete data for all
countries with any proven reserves are below [Figure 1.] .
Question. What proportion of procurement contracts at the African
Development Bank and the African Development Fund is awarded to U.S.
businesses? What proportion of these contracts is awarded to Chinese
businesses? What specific steps would you advocate for at the African
Development Bank and the African Development Fund to increase the
percentage of contracts awarded to U.S. companies?
Answer. In 2014, U.S. businesses received 0.54 percent of all
procurement contracts by number and 0.26 percent of procurement
contracts by value. Chinese business received 1.94 percent of contracts
by number and 24.28 percent by value. If confirmed, I will advocate for
maintaining transparent and competitive procurement practices and an
increased focus on a value-for-money approach that considers costs over
the full life cycle of projects rather than merely the lowest priced
bid. U.S. firms are typically better positioned when such a value-for-
money approach is taken. I understand that the African Development Bank
is currently reviewing its procurement policies, which provides an
opportunity to encourage a better focus on value-for-money approach to
be reflected in the African Development Bank's updated procurement
policies.
Figure 1.
Question. What do you believe is an appropriate role for China to
play at the African Development Bank and African Development Fund?
Answer. China is a nonregional shareholder of the African
Development Bank and a donor to the African Development Fund. China
should continue to engage constructively with other AfDB shareholders
and AfDB Management to support Africa's development. As China's income
and role in the global economy grows, it should support the poorest
countries by contributing more to the concessional window, the African
Development Fund.
Question. What is your view of China's recently launched Asian
Infrastructure Investment Bank and the Chinese investment efforts in
Africa? How will these efforts complement or duplicate efforts at the
African Development Bank?
Answer. It is widely acknowledge that there is a pressing need to
enhance infrastructure investment in Africa and around the world. China
can provide an important contribution to Africa's development through
its infrastructure investments, provided they maintain high-quality
standards and operate within strong safeguards including established
fiduciary, economic, and social safeguards. I believe that any new
multilateral financial institution should share the international
community's strong commitment to the high-quality standards of the
existing multilateral development banks, including the African
Development Bank. My understanding is that the AIIB intends to focus
exclusively in Asia. However, if confirmed, I would encourage the
African Development Bank to seek to ensure that any institution
providing financing in Africa maintains these high-quality standards
and operational safeguards.
Question. Please describe the planned $2 billion African
Development Bank--People's Bank of China African Common Growth Fund and
the U.S. view of this initiative. Is the United States considering a
similar arrangement for the administration's Power Africa Initiative?
Answer. China created and will contribute $2 billion, over 10
years, to the Africa Growing Together Fund (AGTF) that will be housed
at the AfDB. The AGTF will cofinance projects eligible for AfDB
financing using a variety of funding modalities. The United States
welcomes the additional financing that China will be making available
to support Africa's development through the AGTF, especially as all
projects financed from the AGTF must use the AfDB's standards,
including those related to environmental and social safeguards and
procurement rules.
While the United States has not considered a designated funding
mechanism for its Power Africa partnership with the AfDB, the AfDB
itself has pledged $3 billion of its own funds toward reaching the
goals set by Power Africa. Power Africa is working closely with the
AfDB to identify priority Power Africa transactions and allocate
resources accordingly. In addition, both the AfDB and Power Africa have
seconded staff members to the other's organization to enhance
coordination. Power Africa has also provided $3 million to the African
Legal Support Facility, an AfDB initiative that strengthens African
countries' legal expertise and negotiating capacity in debt management
and litigation, natural resources and extractive industries management
and contracting, investment agreements, and related commercial and
business transactions.
Question. The African Development Bank President Kaberuka
recommended combining the African Development Bank and the African
Development Fund lending windows into a single facility.
Do you support this proposal? Did the 13th replenishment of
the African Development Fund replenishment negotiations address
this matter? What are the benefits and risks of providing
market-rate and concessional assistance through the same
facility?
Answer. I understand that while President Kaberuka expressed
interest in this idea, AfDB Management has not actively proposed it
during the negotiations on the 13th replenishment of the African
Development Fund (AfDF) or since. The United States welcomes ideas from
the multilateral development banks on how they can use innovative
financial options to expand their lending capacity without additional
resources from shareholders, and I understand that Asian Development
Bank shareholders unanimously approved a similar proposal recently. I
also understand that this approach would be more difficult for the AfDB
due to the status of the AfDB and the AfDF as separate legal entities.
The main benefit of such an approach is that the equity built up in the
concessional window can be leveraged to create additional concessional
and nonconcessional lending capacity. Risks include the need to ensure
that the extra resources generated continue to benefit poorer countries
and the need to maintain an appropriate level of concessionality in
lending to these countries.
Question. The elections for a new President of the African
Development Bank is taking place on May 28, 2015.
Who is currently running for President of the African
Development Bank and what are the main priorities of each of
the candidates?
Answer. Dr. Akinwumi Adesina, the Minister of Agriculture from
Nigeria, was elected as the next President of the AfDB on May 28, 2015.
The other candidates were:
Jaloul Ayed, former Minister of Finance, Tunisia;
Sufian Ahmed Beker, Minister of Finance, Ethiopia;
Kordje Bedoumra, Minister of Finance, Chad;
Cristina Duarte, Minister of Finance, Cabo Verde;
Samura Kamara, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Sierra Leone;
Thomas Zondo Sakala, former Vice President of the AfDB, Zimbabwe;
and
Birama Sidibe, Vice President of the Islamic Development Bank,
Mali.
Each candidate's vision statement is available at www.afdb.org/en/
news-and- events/article/eight-candidates-in-the-running-for-the-next-
afdb-presidency-submit-their-vision-for-the-bank-and-africa-14111/. All
of the candidates prioritized building on the legacy of President
Donald Kaberuka, supporting the private sector in Africa, reducing
Africa's infrastructure deficit, enhancing inclusive growth and
creating jobs for youth and women, building the capacity of fragile and
conflict-affected states, and attracting the staff that the AfDB needs
to play a leading role in these areas.
Question. What criterion does the United States use when deciding
who to vote for as President of the Bank? What is your evaluation of
these candidates?
Answer. The United States seeks candidates with a strong vision for
supporting private sector-led growth and poverty reduction in Africa, a
sound understanding of the AfDB's comparative advantages, a clear
agenda for implementing the institutional reforms needed to make the
AfDB more effective and to attract and retain high-quality managers and
staff, and the ability to represent the AfDB as a leading development
institution in Africa and globally. I welcome that there were several
qualified candidates contesting the election.
Question. Which of the candidates is the United States supporting
at the May 28, 2015 election?
Answer. The United States welcomed that there were several well-
qualified candidates that contested the election. I was not involved in
the voting process for the United States. If confirmed, I look forward
to working with Dr. Adesina to continue strengthening the AfDB so that
it remains a leading contributor to Africa's development and a key
partner for U.S. development efforts.
__________
Responses of Brian James Egan, Nominated to be Legal Adviser to the
Department of State, to Questions from Members of the Committee
brian egan's responses to
questions from senator corker
Question. Congress has long understood that the 2001 AUMF covered:
(1) al-Qaeda; and (2) ``associated forces'' of al-Qaeda. Please
describe the administration's legal view of why it is that ISIS is
covered by the 2001 AUMF.
Answer. The 2001 AUMF authorizes the use of force against al-Qaeda,
the Taliban, and associated forces. Based on ISIL's long-standing
relationship with al-Qaeda and Usama bin Laden; its long history of
conducting, and continued desire to conduct, attacks against U.S.
persons and interests; the extensive history of U.S. combat operations
against ISIL dating back to the time the group first affiliated with
al-Qaeda in 2004 and was known as al-Qaeda in Iraq; and ISIL's
position--supported by some individual members and factions of al-
Qaeda-aligned groups--that it is the true inheritor of Usama bin
Laden's legacy, the administration has concluded that the President may
rely on the 2001 AUMF as statutory authority for the use of force
against ISIL, notwithstanding the public split between al-Qaeda's
senior leadership and ISIL. A contrary interpretation of the statute
would allow al-Qaeda and its cobelligerents, rather than the President
and the Congress, to control the scope of the AUMF by splintering into
rival factions while still continuing to prosecute the same conflict
against the United States.
Question. Does the administration currently have statutory or
article II authority to defend U.S.- or coalition-trained forces in
Iraq and Syria if those forces come under direct threat from ISIS, al-
Nusra, Assad regime forces, Hezbollah, or any other armed groups?
Answer. The administration's position is that the 2001 AUMF would
provide authority to conduct military operations in defense of U.S.- or
coalition-trained forces against ISIL, the Nusrah Front, and other
groups who are either part of or associated forces of al-Qaeda, in the
same manner as it does for ongoing U.S. operations against those
groups. The administration also believes that the 2002 Iraq AUMF would
provide legal authority for military operations in some circumstances
against ISIL in defense of U.S.- or coalition-trained forces in Syria.
The question whether the 2001 AUMF, the 2002 AUMF, or the
President's article II authority would provide legal authority to
defend those forces against Assad regime forces or other armed groups
would be more difficult.
The 2001 AUMF authorizes the President to use ``all necessary and
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he
determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist
attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such
organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of
international terrorism against the United States by such nations,
organizations or persons.'' To be an ``associated force'' of al-Qaeda a
group must be both (1) an organized, armed group that has entered the
fight alongside al-Qaeda, and (2) a cobelligerent with al-Qaeda in
hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners. The
determination that a particular group is an associated force is made at
the most senior levels of the U.S. Government, following reviews by
senior government lawyers and informed by departments and agencies with
relevant expertise and institutional roles, including all-source
intelligence from the U.S. intelligence community.
The 2002 AUMF authorizes the President to ``use the Armed Force of
the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in
order to--(1) defend the national security of the United States against
the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and (2) enforce all relevant
United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.'' Although
the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq was the focus of
the 2002 AUMF, the statute, in accordance with its express goals, has
always been understood to authorize the use of force for additional
purposes. Those purposes include helping to establish a stable,
democratic Iraq to succeed Saddam Hussein's regime and addressing
terrorist threats emanating from Iraq. At a minimum, to the extent that
military operations against ISIL in Syria are necessary in order to
achieve these purposes, they are authorized by the 2002 AUMF.
The President has authority under the Constitution to use force not
amounting to ``war'' in the constitutional sense, where he reasonably
determines that such force serves a sufficiently important national
interest, at least insofar as the Congress has not specifically
restricted it by statute. Whether the use of military force constitutes
a ``war'' within the meaning of the Declaration of War Clause would, as
described in previous opinions from the Justice Department's Office of
Legal Counsel, involve the need for a fact-specific assessment of the
anticipated nature, scope, and duration of the planned military
operations and of the exposure of U.S. military personnel to
significant risk over a substantial period.
As a policy matter, the nature and extent of the support that the
United States is prepared to provide to U.S.-trained Syrian forces is
critically important and under active consideration, but as of this
point has not been decided. If confirmed as Legal Adviser, I would look
forward to working closely with this committee to explain the legal
issues related to any decision that is made.
Question. With U.S. forces on the ground in Iraq and conducting
activities in both Iraq and Syria, what authority to protect and defend
those forces, if any, is currently available under the 2001 or 2002
AUMFs, and is there something additional you gain under the 2002 AUMF
but not the 2001 AUMF?
Answer. The administration's position is that the 2001 AUMF and, at
least in some circumstances, the 2002 AUMF provide legal authority for
the ongoing U.S. military operations in Iraq and Syria, including the
authority to use military force in defense of U.S. forces.
The 2001 AUMF authorizes the President to use ``all necessary and
appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons'' he
determines were responsible for the 9/11 attacks, and it is not limited
to a specific country or geographic region. This authorization clearly
covers Usama bin Laden and al-Qaeda, and Congress and the federal
courts have confirmed the Executive branch's view that the AUMF also
authorizes the use of force against associated forces of al-Qaeda, each
of which must be both (1) an organized, armed group that has entered
the fight alongside al-Qaeda, and (2) a cobelligerent with al-Qaeda in
hostilities against the United States or its coalition partners.
The 2001 AUMF authorized the use of force against ISIL beginning in
at least 2004, when ISIL, then known as al-Qaeda in Iraq, pledged its
allegiance to Bin Laden. Bin Laden then publicly endorsed the group as
al-Qaeda's official affiliate in Iraq. After its formal affiliation
with al-Qaeda, the group conducted numerous terrorist attacks against
the United States and its coalition partners, and in response, the
United States engaged in extensive combat operations against it.
The 2002 Iraq AUMF provides an alternative source of legal
authority for U.S. military operations against ISIL in Iraq and, at
least in some circumstances, in Syria. Among other things, the 2002
AUMF authorizes the use of force to ``defend the national security of
the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq,''
including in defense of U.S. forces.
The President has made clear that he would welcome bipartisan
congressional action on a new, limited authorization for the use of
military force that would specifically address the threat posed by
ISIL. The President's AUMF proposal, among other things, would repeal
the 2002 AUMF because the President believes the authority he would
have under his proposal and the 2001 AUMF would be sufficient to
conduct the operations that are ongoing in Iraq and Syria, including
any operations to protect and defend the U.S. Forces who are part of
those operations.
Question. The administration believes it has authority under the
2001 AUMF to use ``all necessary and appropriate force'' against ISIS.
Does the administration have article II authority, on its own, to
conduct the military activities we are currently engaged in against
ISIS, or is congressional authorization necessary?
Answer. The administration has concluded that the 2001 AUMF
provides legal authority to use military force against ISIL in Iraq and
Syria. The administration has also concluded that the 2002 Iraq AUMF
provides legal authority for military operations against ISIL in Iraq
and, in at least some circumstances, against ISIL in Syria. The
military activities against ISIL in which the United States is
currently engaged in Iraq and Syria are being conducted pursuant to
those statutory authorities. Because of its conclusion that the 2001
and 2002 AUMFs provide the necessary legal authority for the President,
the administration has not developed a legal position on the question
posed; namely, whether the President could rely on article II authority
alone to continue to conduct the ongoing military activities we are
currently engaged in against ISIL.
The Constitution recognizes important roles for both the President
and the Congress in relation to the use of military force by the United
States. As the administration has previously indicated to this
committee, the President has authority under the Constitution to use
force not amounting to ``war'' in the constitutional sense where he
reasonably determines that such force serves a sufficiently important
national interest, at least insofar as the Congress has not
specifically restricted it by statute. Any analysis of the President's
constitutional authorities to conduct these same operations in the
absence of the AUMFs would therefore require a fact-specific assessment
of the national interests served by these operations and their
anticipated nature, scope, and duration, among other factors.
The administration has been clear in describing the critical
national interests that are served by our ongoing efforts to degrade
and ultimately defeat ISIL in Iraq and Syria. At the same time, this
and previous administrations have recognized the congressional
interest, including as reflected in the War Powers Resolution, in
providing express congressional authorization for the use of force by
the U.S. military in major, prolonged conflicts such as the wars in
Vietnam and Korea.
Regardless, the President has made clear that he believes that it
is important that decisions to send members of our military into harm's
way enjoy the support of Congress and the American people. This is the
reason that the President has submitted the proposed ISIL AUMF to the
Congress. I share that view, and, if confirmed, I would use my voice
within the administration to support robust consultation with Congress
on such matters, and to ensure that deliberations and consultations
with Congress are fully informed by the important constitutional
responsibilities of both branches of government in this area.
__________
brian egan's response to a
question from senator cardin
Question. Given the foreign policy objectives of the section 1504
rule, please discuss how you intend to engage with the SEC to ensure
that they issue a strong rule that serves U.S. foreign policy goals.
Answer. Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and
Consumer Protection Act requires reporting issuers engaged in the
commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals to disclose in
an annual report certain payments to the United States or foreign
governments for the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or
minerals. Section 1504 advances U.S. foreign policy interests by
ensuring transparency and reducing corruption in the extractives
sector, supporting international initiatives related to extractive
industry transparency, and more broadly, promoting energy security and
supporting global economic development.
If confirmed as Legal Adviser, I will work with the State
Department's policy bureaus to ensure that the SEC is appropriately
aware of these foreign policy interests so that they may be given due
regard in the rulemaking process.
__________
brian egan's responses to
questions from senator barrasso
Question #1. Do you believe a resolution adopted by the U.N.
Security Council can preempt U.S. law?
Answer. No. U.N. member states are required under international law
to accept and carry out decisions of the Security Council in accordance
with the Charter of the United Nations. This does not, however, preempt
the obligation to comply with applicable provisions of U.S. domestic
law. When deciding whether to support or oppose proposed Security
Council resolutions, the Department of State, working with other
departments and agencies, carefully considers whether actions that
would be required under the resolutions would be consistent with U.S.
law. The United States has the right, under Article 27 of the U.N.
Charter, to veto resolutions that would impose requirements that would
be inconsistent with U.S. domestic law and thereby prevent their
adoption.
Question #2. Could the executive branch use a U.N. Security Council
resolution to justify action that U.S. law would otherwise not allow?
Answer. No. The executive branch cannot take actions that it is
prohibited from taking under U.S. law. Thus, the fact that a U.N.
Security Council resolution authorizes a particular action will not
enable the executive branch to carry it out if the action is
impermissible under U.S. law.
Question #3. If the U.N. Security Council adopted a resolution
requiring countries to lift sanctions on Iran, would the U.S. be
obligated to comply?
Answer. In the case of Iran, the Security Council adopted a series
of resolutions beginning in 2006 requiring U.N. member states to impose
certain sanctions on Iran. When the Security Council makes a decision
requiring U.N. member states to impose sanctions, U.N. member states
are required under international law to accept and carry out that
decision in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations. A
Security Council decision to lift these requirements would relieve U.N.
member states of their international legal obligation to maintain the
sanctions on Iran that were the subject of the Security Council
resolutions, but would not prevent the United States or other U.N.
member states from continuing to impose sanctions on a national basis
under their domestic law. In any event, as explained in response to
Question #1, the United States has the right, under Article 27 of the
U.N. Charter, to veto resolutions that would impose requirements that
would be inconsistent with U.S. domestic law and thereby prevent their
adoption.
Question #4. What types of agreements are constitutionally required
to take the form of a treaty and must be submitted to the Senate for
advice and consent to ratification?
Answer. The Constitution's text does not specify particular types
of agreements that must take the form of a treaty. As a matter of
practice, the United States has entered into a variety of agreements
approved by statute rather than through the procedures specified in the
Constitution's Treaty Clause. These include the United Nations
Headquarters Agreement; agreements establishing the World Bank, the
International Monetary Fund, and other international financial
institutions; the agreement establishing the International Labor
Organization; the SALT I Interim Agreement; and trade agreements
including NAFTA and the agreement establishing the World Trade
Organization. This practice suggests that the executive branch, Senate,
and House of Representatives together have understood themselves to
have significant latitude to use regular legislative procedures as an
alternative to the procedures specified in the Treaty Clause for the
approval of international agreements when collectively they deem it
appropriate to do so.
If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to work with this
committee on issues related to the approval of treaties and other forms
of international agreements. Administrations of both political parties
have a history of working with the Congress to identify international
agreements that would be subject to the Constitution's Treaty Clause
and agreements that could be concluded with other forms of
congressional approval or as a sole executive agreement.
Questions #5 & #6. Is the President only able to enter sole
Executive agreements concerning matters under his exclusive
constitutional authority, or may these agreements also concern matters
over which authority is shared with Congress?
What domestic or international legal effect do ``sole executive
agreements'' have when there is a conflicting federal statute?
Answer. In analyzing the scope of the President's authority with
respect to international agreements, the Supreme Court has referred to
the framework outlined in Justice Jackson's concurrence in Youngstown
Sheet and Tube v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952). That framework indicates
that the President's authority is at its maximum when he acts pursuant
to an express or implied authorization from Congress; that when he acts
in the absence of either a congressional grant or denial of authority,
he can only rely upon his own independent powers; and that when the
President takes measures incompatible with the expressed or implied
will of Congress, his power is at its lowest ebb, for then he can rely
only upon his own constitutional powers minus any constitutional powers
of Congress over the matter. Id. at 635-638.
Consistent with this framework, the validity of any particular
Executive agreement as a matter of U.S. law would depend on factors
including the particular matter addressed by the agreement, the extent
of the President's independent constitutional authority with regard to
that matter, and whether Congress had legislated with respect to the
matter. For example, where an Executive agreement conflicts with a
federal statute, Justice Jackson's concurrence indicates that ``Courts
can sustain exclusive Presidential control in such a case only by
disabling the Congress from acting upon the subject.'' It further
observes that ``Presidential claim to a power at once so conclusive and
preclusive must be scrutinized with caution.''
The fact that an international agreement may conflict with a
federal statute does not affect the status of the agreement as a matter
of international law. In Medellin v. Texas, the Supreme Court observed
that, although the President lacked the authority as a matter of U.S.
law to give effect to an obligation under an international agreement at
issue in the case, ``no one disputes that it constitutes an
international law obligation on the part of the United States.'' 552
U.S. 491, 536 (2008).
Question #7. Under existing law, the United States is required to
suspend direct foreign assistance to the government of any country
whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup
d'etat or decree or a coup d'etat or decree in which the military plays
a decisive role. How is a coup d'etat defined under existing U.S. law?
Answer. The annual Department of State, Foreign Operations, and
Related Programs Appropriations Acts provides that certain funds in the
Act may not ``be obligated or expended to finance directly any
assistance to the government of any country whose duly elected head of
government is deposed by military coup d'etat or decree or, after the
date of enactment of this Act, a coup d'etat or decree in which the
military plays a decisive role.'' This ``military coup restriction''
contains three elements that must be met in order to trigger the
restriction: (1) whether the head of government was duly elected; (2)
whether the head of government was removed from office, and (3) whether
the removal was effectuated by the military or whether the military
played a decisive role in the removal. Whether the military coup
restriction could be triggered in connection with a particular change
in government requires a detailed factual inquiry into all of the
relevant circumstances.
Question #8. As noted, appropriations law requires the termination
of certain foreign assistance if an elected head of government is
deposed by a coup. At the time, an administration official was asked if
it is ``still U.S. policy that we are not determining that a coup was
carried out in July in Egypt.'' He replied: ``Nothing has changed in
terms of approaching what you called the coup restriction; didn't make
a determination, haven't made a determination, don't think we need to
make a determination, are acting consistent with the provisions of the
law and we'll continue to do so.''
In your opinion, did a coup occur in Egypt when Egyptian
President Morsi was deposed from power?
Answer. The military coup restriction in the annual Department of
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act does
not require a determination to be made with respect to a particular
change in government, so long as any assistance provided to the
relevant government could be provided even if the restriction were
triggered. Accordingly, the administration took action to restrict
certain assistance to Egypt consistent with the military coup
restriction until new legislation was enacted with regard to assistance
for the Government of Egypt.
The administration decided it was not in U.S. foreign policy or
national security interests to characterize the events in Egypt as
either a military coup or not a military coup. Such a characterization
would implicate a highly polarized debate in Egypt. The administration
concluded that inserting the United States into that debate would
undermine U.S. interests in a peaceful resolution to the crisis, risk
alienating roughly half of the population in Egypt, and potentially put
U.S. facilities and personnel in the region at increased risk.
Question #9. After a head of government is deposed from power, how
long does the State Department have to determine if a coup took place?
Answer. The military coup restriction in the annual Department of
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act does
not require a determination to be made with respect to a particular
change in government, so long as any assistance provided to the
relevant government could be provided even if the restriction were
triggered.
As explained in response to Question #7, three elements must be met
in order to trigger the restriction: (1) whether the head of government
was duly elected; (2) whether the head of government was removed from
office, and (3) whether the removal was effectuated by the military or
whether the military played a decisive role in the removal. Whether
this restriction could be triggered in connection with a particular
change in government requires a detailed factual inquiry into all of
the relevant circumstances, and in some instances the facts on the
ground may not be clear for a period of time.
Questions #10 & #11. How is it consistent with the law to never
make a determination whether a coup actually happened when a leader is
deposed from power?
What other statutory regimes is this method of legal analysis
applied to?
Answer. The military coup restriction in the annual Department of
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Acts
provides that certain funds in the Act may not ``be obligated or
expended to finance directly any assistance to the government of any
country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military
coup d'etat or decree or, after the date of enactment of this Act, a
coup d'etat or decree in which the military plays a decisive role.'' If
the standard in the legislation is met, assistance must be restricted
consistent with the military coup restriction. On the other hand, so
long as any assistance provided to the relevant government could be
provided even if the military coup restriction were triggered, it is
consistent with the law not to make a determination. Many countries
receive no assistance from the U.S. Government; others receive
assistance that would not be impacted by the military coup restriction
(for example, assistance only for nongovernmental activities).
Therefore, the applicability of this provision varies with respect to
the nature of our assistance. The Department of State's efforts to
ensure compliance with the military coup restriction are consistent
with its broader efforts to ensure compliance with all applicable
funding restrictions.
Question #12. There has been a lot of discussion about the type and
form of a comprehensive agreement on Iran's nuclear program. The
administration claims that a final deal on Iran's nuclear program will
be an Executive agreement instead of a treaty requiring the advice and
consent of the Senate for ratification. What is the legal basis for
this position?
Answer. The administration has made clear that the P5+1 discussions
with Iran are directed toward the conclusion of a nonbinding
arrangement. Nonbinding arrangements are not Executive agreements in
that they do not create legal obligations under U.S. or international
law. As White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough indicated in a March
14, 2015, letter to Senator Corker, such nonbinding arrangements have
been utilized by Presidents of both parties throughout our history to
address a range of diplomatic and national security matters and do not
require congressional approval.
Question #13. What conditions or provisions in a new climate change
agreement would not require the advice and consent to ratification by
the Senate?
Answer. It is my understanding that the international discussions
on a new climate change agreement are continuing and have not resulted
in any final decisions on any conditions or provisions of the new
agreement. Accordingly, I am not in a position to speculate as to
whether any of the terms of the final agreement will require Senate
advice and consent.
The administration will continue to consult with the committee
regarding the negotiations. During his confirmation hearing, Secretary
Kerry assured this committee that any international agreement brought
into force for the United States will be done consistent with the U.S.
Constitution.
Question #14. What form of agreement is the United States
advocating for during the international negotiations? Has the
administration been pushing for the agreement to be legally binding
during the negotiations?
Answer. A 2011 decision of the Parties to the United Nations
Framework Convention on Climate Change, adopted in Durban, South
Africa, launched a process to develop a ``protocol, another legal
instrument, or an agreed outcome with legal force under the Convention
applicable to all Parties. . . . ''
The Durban decision makes clear that the purpose of a future Paris
agreement is to further the objective of the Convention (i.e., to avoid
dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate), yet leaves the
Parties with substantial flexibility regarding its form and the legal
nature of its provisions.
It is my understanding that at this stage the international
discussions are more focused on the substance of the agreement than on
issues related to its form, such as whether it should be a protocol or
whether particular provisions should be legally binding. The
administration has indicated that the United States seeks an agreement
that is ambitious in light of the climate challenge; that reflects
nationally determined mitigation efforts in line with national
circumstances and capabilities; that provides for accountability with
respect to such efforts; that takes account of evolving emissions and
economic trends; and that promotes adaptation by Parties to climate
impacts.
Question #15.Will the final agreement be legally binding on the
United States and other countries, including funding commitments for
any provision contained within the agreement?
Answer. Please see response to Question #14.
Question #16. Can the administration enter into a politically
binding international agreement without congressional approval?
Answer. I understand the term ``politically binding'' to refer to
arrangements that do not give rise to legal obligations under U.S. or
international law. As White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough
indicated in a March 14, 2015, letter to Senator Corker in response to
questions regarding negotiations with Iran, such nonbinding
arrangements have been utilized by Presidents of both parties
throughout our history to address a range of diplomatic and national
security matters and do not require congressional approval.
Question #17. What state, local governing entity, or community
would not be subject to a politically binding agreement?
Answer. I understand the term ``politically binding'' to refer to
arrangements that do not give rise to legal obligations under U.S. or
international law. Accordingly, any such nonbinding arrangements would
create no legal obligations for any state, local governing entity, or
community.
Question #18. Has the Palestinian accession and acceptance of the
International Criminal Court jurisdiction triggered this prohibition on
the Economic Support Fund assistance?
Answer. The administration continually reviews its assistance to
ensure compliance with U.S. law, including those provisions pertaining
to assistance to the Palestinian Authority.
At this stage, the administration does not believe that any of the
legislative restrictions on Economic Support Fund (ESF) assistance to
the Palestinian Authority have been triggered. At the same time, in
light of the latest developments, the administration has indicated that
it is reviewing our assistance for the Palestinian Authority to ensure
that it supports our policy.
Question #19. Has the International Criminal Court Prosecutor's
opening of a preliminary examination of the situation in the
Palestinian territories, enabled by the Palestinian ad hoc declaration,
triggered the prohibition on Economic Support Fund assistance? If the
prohibition has not been triggered, what steps would the Palestinians
or the International Criminal Court have to take for the prohibition to
take effect?
Answer. The administration strongly disagreed with the decision by
the ICC Prosecutor to open a preliminary examination of the situation
in ``Palestine'' and has indicated that it will continue to oppose
actions against Israel at the ICC as counterproductive to the cause of
peace.
At this stage, the administration does not believe that legislative
restrictions on ESF assistance to the Palestinian Authority have been
triggered. At the same time, in light of the latest developments, the
administration has indicated that it is reviewing our assistance for
the Palestinian Authority to ensure that it supports our policy.
It is difficult to predict how events may develop in the future and
an assessment of whether particular restrictions have been triggered
would need to take into account the specific circumstances as they may
evolve. If confirmed, I would expect to work with Secretary Kerry and
other officials at the State Department to monitor the situation
closely.
Question #20. What are the defects in Palestinian claims to
statehood or sovereignty? What steps is the United States taking or
planning to take to challenge Palestinian accession to the Rome Statute
and acceptance of ICC jurisdiction?
Answer. The view of the United States is that the Palestinians have
not yet established a state and are not eligible to become a party to
the Rome Statute. We remain committed to achieving a negotiated two-
state solution that would result in two states living side by side in
peace and security. We continue to believe that the conflict between
the Israelis and the Palestinians ultimately should be resolved by the
parties reaching an agreement on final status issues.
With respect to the ICC, the United States has made clear its
opposition to Palestinian action in seeking to join the Rome Statute of
the International Criminal Court. This step is counterproductive, will
damage the atmosphere with the very people with whom Palestinians
ultimately need to make peace, and will do nothing to further the
aspirations of the Palestinian people for a sovereign and independent
state. Our actions have included formal submission by the United States
of a diplomatic note to the treaty depositary for the Rome Statute
setting forth our view that the Palestinians are not eligible to become
a party to the treaty, and of a notification to the Registry of the
Court itself to make clear that the Palestinians are ineligible to
accept the jurisdiction of the Court under Article 12(3) of the Rome
Statute. The United States issued a public statement strongly
disagreeing with the decision by the ICC Prosecutor to open a
preliminary examination of the situation in ``Palestine'' and
indicating we will continue to oppose actions against Israel at the ICC
as counterproductive to the cause of peace. The United States continues
to make our opposition known to the Palestinians and the international
community.
Question #21. Do you believe Russia is in ``material breach'' of
its obligations under the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty?
What are the differences between an activity described as a ``material
breach'' versus a violation?
Answer. The international legal doctrine of material breach allows
one party to terminate a treaty or suspend its operation in whole or in
part based on inter alia another party's violation of a provision
essential to the accomplishment of the object and purpose of the
treaty.
The administration has made clear its extremely serious concerns
about Russia's violation of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF)
Treaty's ban on the possession, production, and flight-testing of
intermediate range missiles. However, the administration does not
believe it is in the interest of the United States to suspend the INF
Treaty at this time. As a result, the administration has not invoked
the doctrine of material breach. The administration's current efforts
are focused on convincing Russia to return to compliance and preserving
the viability of the
INF Treaty, which the administration believes continues to serve U.S.
and allied interests.
__________
NOMINATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Gregory T. Delawie, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Kosovo
Ian C. Kelly, of Illinois, to be Ambassador to Georgia
Nancy Bikoff Pettit, to be Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia
Julieta Valls Noyes, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Croatia
Azita Raji, of California, to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of
Sweden
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:20 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson,
presiding.
Present: Senators Johnson, Gardner, Shaheen, Kaine, and
Murphy.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN
Senator Johnson. This hearing is called to order.
I would like to first recognize--the Ambassador from
Georgia who is here in the audience today. Welcome.
I am pleased to be holding this hearing to confirm some
very qualified individuals who are willing to serve this Nation
in the capacity of Ambassadors to Kosovo, to Georgia, to
Latvia, to Sweden, and to Croatia.
I have been in the Senate now for 4 years, on Senator
Foreign Relations for 2\1/2\, and I just have to say that I
have always been very impressed with the quality of career
Foreign Service individuals and people who serve this Nation in
the capacity of Ambassadors. From my standpoint, it is such an
important position, in terms of being able to convey our values
around the world. I hope you all take that responsibility--I am
sure you will--very seriously, conveying that America, although
we are not perfect, has been a phenomenal force for good in the
world. I certainly always ask our Ambassadors to think of how
you can utilize this committee, whether it is holding hearings
or potentially passing resolutions to reinforce the work you
are doing in those countries that you are representing America
for. I also point out to our Ambassadors that you are
representing those countries back to America. It is really a
two-way street. I certainly appreciate your willingness to
serve.
I know Senator Shaheen has a tight schedule, so I will not
say anything further until I introduce the nominees.
Senator Shaheen.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEANNE SHAHEEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome. I want to congratulate each of you on your
nominations, and express my appreciation to you for your
willingness to serve this country and take on these new
responsibilities at such a critical time.
I also want to welcome all of your families who are here
today. And I hope that you will introduce them as you are
starting your statements.
You have all been named for ambassadorial posts in
important countries in strategic areas of Europe. We are
considering your nominations and our relations with these
countries against the backdrop of an aggressive Russia in
Europe's east and growing instability in its south, in the
Middle East and in North Africa. I look forward to discussing a
wide range of issues regarding the countries that you are going
to serve, and other challenges facing Europe today, and hope
that you will be confirmed to these very important posts.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Johnson. Senator Kaine, would you like to make a
comment, or----
Senator Kaine. No, thank you.
Senator Johnson. Okay.
With that, I will just introduce you one at a time before
your testimony. And we will start from my right, going left,
with Mr. Delawie. Mr. Greg Delawie is currently the Deputy
Assistant Secretary within the Bureau of Arms Control,
Verification, and Compliance at the State Department. He is a
career member of the Senior Foreign Service, and he is the
nominee for Ambassador to Kosovo.
Mr. Delawie.
STATEMENT OF GREGORY T. DELAWIE, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF KOSOVO
Mr. Delawie. Thank you very much, Chairman Johnson, Ranking
Member Shaheen, Senator Kaine.
It is an honor and a privilege to appear before you today
as the President's nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of
Kosovo. I deeply appreciate the confidence President Obama and
Secretary Kerry have placed in me.
I am accompanied today by my wife, Vonda Delawie, a retired
Foreign Service officer, and, further back, my daughter,
Torrence, and my son, Fred, all of whom have shared with me the
joys and challenges of bouncing from one country to the next.
For all of us, it has been an honor to work for the American
people and to represent them to the rest of the world.
The United States relationship with Europe's youngest
democracy is based on a shared vision of Kosovo's legitimate
place in a Europe whole, free, and at peace. Indeed, Kosovo has
made remarkable progress since declaring independence. It has
drafted and implemented modern laws, economic growth has been
steady, and security throughout the country has improved,
creating an atmosphere that allows the EU-led dialogue between
Kosovo and Serbia to flourish.
Despite these significant achievements, Kosovo continues to
face many obstacles. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will lead a
whole-of-government U.S. effort to help it surmount the
remaining challenges to its becoming a fully democratic,
multiethnic, sovereign nation.
If confirmed, I will focus on three central and highly
interdependent areas: strengthening the rule of law, increasing
regional security, and promoting economic reforms. I would like
to share what I see as our priorities, beginning with the rule
of law.
First, corruption hampers Kosovo's democratic and economic
development. The Government of Kosovo must develop a
coordinated approach to addressing it. If confirmed, I will
intensify interagency support for Kosovo's anticorruption
efforts and help restore citizens' faith in their government.
Next, Kosovo must respond appropriately to allegations of
serious crimes committed between 1998 and 2000. Kosovo must
uphold its commitments by adopting, soon, the necessary legal
measures to set up a special court to handle any potential
indictments stemming from the ongoing investigation into the
alleged crimes committed during this period. I will, if
confirmed, encourage the Government of Kosovo to diligently
support the court's judicial proceedings.
Third, Kosovo confronts a significant human trafficking
problem, despite having good antitrafficking and victim-
protection laws. If confirmed, I will work with Kosovo to
implement these laws and intensify the fight against this
modern form of slavery.
In terms of regional security, normalization of the Kosovo-
Serbia relationship is a fundamental requirement for lasting
stability in the Balkans. We continue to fully support the EU-
led dialogue between Kosovo and Serbia, and full implementation
of all elements of the April 2013 Agreement on Normalization.
If confirmed, I will champion minority rights and promote
integration throughout Kosovo. We must also find durable
solutions for thousands of displaced persons.
I applaud Kosovo for its robust efforts to confront the
threat posed by foreign terrorist fighters heading to Syria and
Iraq, and Kosovo's participation in the counter-ISIL coalition.
With U.S. assistance, the Government of Kosovo is improving its
capacity to prosecute terrorism cases and developing a national
plan for countering violent extremism. If confirmed, I will
continue backing this important work.
Kosovo is in the process of transitioning from the Kosovo
Security Force to the Kosovo Armed Forces. If confirmed, I will
ensure that the United States guides this transition in a way
that increases regional stability, strengthens democratic
institutions in Kosovo, and positions it to qualify for
eventual NATO membership.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, encouraging Kosovo's economic
reform and development will be one of my highest priorities.
This will be key to reducing high rates of poverty and
unemployment, to promoting regional ties, and to expanding
opportunities for U.S. firms. The lack of dependable electrical
power is widely considered Kosovo's greatest obstacle to
sustained economic growth. If confirmed, I will work with
Kosovo to implement its energy strategy, including promoting
significant growth in renewable energy.
This is a daunting agenda, but I know from my 30-plus years
in the Foreign Service that I will not have to pursue it alone.
I will be able to draw on the experience of the talented team
of Americans and local staff in Embassy Pristina, as well as on
partners from multiple agencies in Washington, and on so many
others who want to see Kosovo succeed. I look forward to
remaining in close consultation with the legislative branch and
this committee to advance U.S. interests in the Balkans.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will do my utmost to promote
a democratic Kosovo whose citizens trust its institutions,
which is at peace with its neighbors, and which is making a
sustainable contribution to the global economy.
Thank you very much for your attention. I hope you will
place your trust in me and confirm me as Ambassador to Kosovo.
I am happy to take any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Delawie follows:]
Prepared Statement of Greg T. Delawie
Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Shaheen, and members of the
committee, it is an honor and a privilege to appear before you today as
the President's nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo. I
deeply appreciate the confidence that President Obama and Secretary
Kerry have placed in me. I hope the committee and the Senate will share
that confidence and confirm me. I am accompanied today by my wife,
Vonda Delawie, a retired Foreign Service officer, my daughter,
Torrence, and my son, Fred, all of whom have shared with me the joys
and challenges of a lifetime bouncing from one country to the next.
Wherever we have served, we have always remembered what an honor it is
to work for the American people and to represent them to the rest of
the world.
Our relationship with Europe's youngest democracy is based on a
shared vision of Kosovo's legitimate place in a Europe whole, free, and
at peace. The government and people of Kosovo deeply respect the United
States, and are grateful for our role in ending the ethnic cleansing of
the late 1990s. Over the past 16 years, with our strong support, Kosovo
has made remarkable progress. Concrete examples of that progress
include Kosovo's 2008 Declaration of Independence and the end of
international supervision in 2012.
A democratic, fully sovereign, and multiethnic Kosovo must become
an integral part of the international community. The United States has
worked and continues to work closely with Kosovo toward that end.
Although Kosovo faces enormous challenges in the interconnected areas
of rule of law, regional security, and economic development, it has
made progress. I would like to highlight some successes:
With U.S. and international support, Kosovo has drafted and
implemented modern laws to bring Kosovo's criminal legislation
in line with international standards, to establish the rules of
criminal procedure mandatory for court proceedings, and to
reform the judicial system. The European Rule of Law Mission,
EULEX, is building capacity in the judicial system, with the
vital help of U.S. police, prosecutors, and judges.
The NATO Kosovo Force, or KFOR, makes a multinational
contribution to regional security. KFOR is uniquely trusted by
Albanians and Serbs alike and its presence creates an
atmosphere that allows the EU-led Dialogue between Kosovo and
Serbia to flourish. The United States provides some 700 troops
to KFOR.
With U.S. guidance, Kosovo has moved up 42 places on the
World Bank's ``Ease of Doing Business'' ranking, from 117th in
2011 to 75th in 2014. We have helped Kosovo privatize its
national airport management and energy distribution companies.
U.S. technical assistance helped Kosovo conclude a landmark
$460 million public-private partnership deal for the Brezovica
ski resort complex.Our USAID economic programs in the last 5
years alone have generated 17,500 new jobs, $330 million in
increased sales, and $37.6 million in new revenues across
multiple sectors.
As impressive as these recent achievements are, Kosovo continues to
face many obstacles. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will devote my time
and energy to leading a whole-of-government U.S. effort to help Kosovo
surmount these obstacles. We will focus on measurable improvement in
three central and highly interdependent areas [the three ``R''s]:
strengthening the rule of law, increasing regional security, and
promoting economic reforms to reduce poverty, unemployment, and energy
insecurity. I'd like to share just a bit about what I see as our
priorities, beginning with the rule of law.
Rule of law
Corruption hampers Kosovo's democratic and economic development. It
deters investment, spurs emigration, and weakens confidence in public
institutions. This in turn can create fertile ground for the growth of
violent extremism. The Government of Kosovo must develop a more
coordinated approach to addressing corruption, engaging all government
agencies in the effort. If confirmed, I will intensify interagency
support for Kosovo's efforts to combat corruption and restore citizens'
faith in their government.
Kosovo must respond appropriately to allegations of serious crimes
committed between 1998 and 2000. Under the auspices of the EU-
established Special Investigative Task Force (SITF), an American
prosecutor found evidence that indictable offenses were committed by a
small number of former Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) senior leaders.
Kosovo must resolve these serious allegations if it is to close this
chapter of its history and move forward with democratic development and
Euro-Atlantic integration. The government is currently adopting the
necessary constitutional amendments, legislation, and agreements to
establish a Special Court to adjudicate SITF cases in line with
international standards. While I hope that these measures will soon be
in place, I will, if confirmed, encourage the Government of Kosovo to
maintain a high level of support and cooperation throughout the
judicial proceedings.
Kosovo confronts a significant human trafficking problem. It has
antitrafficking and victim-protection laws, as well as a shelter for
victims, but does not yet meet minimum standards for enforcement of
antitrafficking laws or victim protection. To improve enforcement, the
U.S. Embassy has provided antitrafficking training to Kosovo Government
officials, and successfully encouraged the foreign ministry to include
training on human trafficking as part of the standard preparation for
all of Kosovo's diplomatic personnel. Kosovo's fight against
trafficking is also supported more generally by U.S.-organized training
for law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges in Kosovo. If confirmed, I
will continue the Embassy's work with Kosovo to implement these laws
and intensify the fight against this modern form of slavery.
Regional security
Normalization of the Kosovo-Serbia relationship is a fundamental
requirement for enduring regional security and is effectively a
precondition for Kosovo to be able to thrive over the long term. We
continue to support the EU-facilitated Kosovo-Serbia High-Level
Dialogue and full implementation of all elements of the April 2013
agreement on normalization, which have been a landmark joint
achievement of U.S. and European Union diplomacy in the Balkans. This
Dialogue success reflects great credit on the political leaders of
Kosovo and Serbia alike for making tough compromises for the good of
their two countries. Dismantling parallel structures and integrating
the predominantly Kosovo Serb northern municipalities into Kosovo's
legal and institutional framework are key to full normalization of
relations. Kosovo has made significant progress: voters of all
ethnicities participated in recent municipal and parliamentary
elections; municipal governments in northern Kosovo are now elected and
constituted under Kosovo law; the main Serb political group, Srpska
List, is part of the governing coalition. Outside the Dialogue context,
bilateral contacts increasingly take place at all levels, from
interministerial dialogue to joint training for customs officers. Some
aspects of normalization remain difficult to achieve, such as the
planned creation of an Association of Serb Majority Municipalities.
If confirmed, I will champion minority rights and promote
integration throughout Kosovo, including more proportional minority
representation in the national and municipal civil services. Kosovo
must find durable solutions for the thousands of vulnerable persons
displaced from Kosovo, many of whom now live in Serbia. U.S. programs
assist some of those displaced in Serbia as well as returnees to
Kosovo, but additional political and programmatic efforts are needed.
Kosovo must also do more to protect the rights of Kosovo's other
minorities, including the Roma, Ashkali, and Balkan Egyptian
population, and promote their societal inclusion.
I applaud Kosovo for its robust efforts to confront the threat
posed by foreign terrorist fighters heading to Syria and Iraq, and its
participation in the Counter-ISIL Coalition. Kosovo passed legislation
making it illegal for Kosovo citizens to join foreign terrorist
organizations. Since November 2013, Kosovo authorities have arrested
over 80 suspects for participation in, or recruitment for, terrorist
groups in Iraq and Syria. With U.S. assistance, the Government of
Kosovo is improving its capacity to prosecute terrorism cases. The U.S.
is also supporting Kosovo's effort to develop a ``whole of government''
approach to countering violent extremism. If confirmed, I will continue
our backing for this important work.
As recommended in its U.S.-facilitated Strategic Security Sector
Review, Kosovo is in the process of transitioning from the Kosovo
Security Force to the Kosovo Armed Forces, with the stated mission of
protecting the nation's territorial integrity, providing military
support to civil authorities in disaster situations, and participating
in international peacekeeping operations. The KAF is expected to
develop capabilities in line with EU and NATO standards. If confirmed,
I will ensure that the United States continues to guide and support
this transition in a manner that is consistent with increasing regional
stability, strengthens democratic institutions in Kosovo, and positions
Kosovo to qualify for eventual NATO membership.
Energy security and economic development
Mr. Chairman, I can guarantee that one of my highest priorities, if
confirmed, will be to continue to press for the reforms needed to
develop Kosovo's economy. This is key to reducing high rates of poverty
and unemployment, to promoting regional ties, and to expanding
opportunities for U.S. exporters and investors. The government's reform
agenda includes strengthening the legal environment necessary to
attract and retain foreign investors, who are already drawn by Kosovo's
relatively young population, low labor costs, and abundant natural
resources. Anticorruption efforts are also vitally important.
The lack of dependable electrical power is widely considered
Kosovo's greatest obstacle to achieving sustained economic growth. The
government has made it a priority to modernize and improve the energy
sector through a comprehensive energy development and security plan. If
confirmed, I will work with Kosovo to implement its energy strategy,
help meet its commitment to join the EU's common energy market, and to
have a substantial share of its energy come from renewable energy
sources by 2020.
Conclusion
This is a daunting agenda. But I know from my 30-plus years in the
Foreign Service that I will not have to pursue it alone. I will be able
to draw on the experience of the talented team of Americans and locally
employed staff at Embassy Pristina, the experienced partners from
multiple agencies in Washington, support from the legislative branch,
and the contributions of private Americans and citizens of so many
other nations who also want to see Kosovo succeed.
Mr. Chairman, for the past seven decades, the United States has
been committed to building a Europe whole, free, and at peace. The work
is not complete, but we know that we can achieve success because we
have already accomplished so much. The history of the last 25 years has
demonstrated how important it is for the United States to be involved
in the Balkans. If confirmed, I will do my utmost to promote our mutual
goal: a democratic Kosovo whose citizens trust its institutions, which
is at peace with its neighbors, and which is making a sustainable
contribution to the global economy.
Thank you very much for your attention. I hope you will place your
trust in me and confirm me as Ambassador to the Republic of Kosovo. I
am happy to take any questions.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Delawie.
Our next nominee is Ambassador Ian Kelly. He is the nominee
for the Ambassador to Georgia. Ambassador Ian Kelly is a career
member of the Foreign Service and currently serves as the
Department of State's Diplomat in Residence at the University
of Illinois--Chicago. Prior to that, he served as U.S.
Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe.
Mr. Kelly.
STATEMENT OF HON. IAN C. KELLY, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO GEORGIA
Ambassador Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Shaheen,
Senator Kaine. I am deeply honored to appear before you as
President Obama's nominee to be Ambassador to Georgia. It is a
particular privilege for me to have a second opportunity to be
considered by this committee and serve the American people in
this way.
If confirmed, I pledge to devote all of my efforts to
advancing U.S. interests and promoting the security of the
American people.
For all 30 years of my government service, my wife,
Francesca, has been by my side, and I am pleased that she is
behind me right now.
Nearly 40 years ago, after spending several months studying
in the U.S.S.R., I visited Tbilisi and was immediately struck
by the vitality and independent spirit of the Georgian people.
A few years later, the Georgian people were in the forefront of
the movement to free the captive nations of the Soviet Union.
We supported their desire for independence then, and we support
it now.
The United States stands firm in its commitment to
Georgia's sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence.
We condemn the ongoing occupation of Georgia's Abkhazia and
South Ossetia regions by Russian forces. Furthermore, Russia's
so-called ``treaties'' with the de facto authorities in
Abkhazia and South Ossetia have absolutely no legitimacy.
In Georgia, an important principle is at stake: the right
of all sovereign nations to choose their own alliances and
associations. The United States and our allies support
Georgia's Euro-Atlantic aspirations, including NATO membership
and EU integration. No third party has the right to veto those
aspirations.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Georgian
Government and my Embassy colleagues in realizing these
aspirations. I will also urge all Georgians who believe in
their country's Euro-Atlantic goals to unite in supporting them
and move their country forward.
On the road to Euro-Atlantic integration, Georgia has made
substantial progress toward becoming a fully democratic state.
Its 2012 and 2013 elections resulted in the first
constitutional changes of government in post-Soviet Georgia.
While progress has been real and substantial, more work needs
to be done for Georgia to realize its goal of an environment
fully conducive to political pluralism. We will work with all
parties in Georgia to help ensure the next parliamentary
elections are the freest and fairest in Georgia's history. The
United States has been a partner in this effort, with a robust
assistance program to help Georgia strengthen accountable
government and consolidate its democratic institutions.
If Georgia's quest to integrate with the West is to
succeed, it is critical that we improve the climate for trade
and investment. This is an area where the government and
opposition should be able to come together. Georgia needs to
take advantage of the great opportunity that its association
agreement with the European Union represents, particularly
increased trade between Georgia and Europe through the
agreement's deep and comprehensive free trade area.
The United States appreciates Georgia's growing role as a
regional business, trade, and logistics hub, and its
contributions to the revitalization of East-West trade routes
along the New Silk Road connecting European and Asian markets.
If confirmed, I will support Georgia's focus on the future,
particularly economic development, to create jobs and
contribute to the long-term stability of the country and the
region.
Mr. Chairman, there is a lot of work to do. And if the
Senate confirms my nomination, I look forward to rolling up my
sleeves and getting down to it, advancing the mutual interests
of the American and Georgian peoples.
Thank you. And I welcome your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Kelly follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ian C. Kelly
Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I am
deeply honored to appear before you as President Obama's nominee to
serve as Ambassador to Georgia. It is a particular privilege for me to
have a second opportunity to be considered by this committee, and serve
the American people in this way. If confirmed, I pledge to devote all
my efforts to advancing U.S. interests and promoting the security of
the American people. For all 30 years of my government service, my wife
Francesca has been by my side, and I am pleased to introduce her to you
today.
Nearly 40 years ago, after spending several months studying in the
U.S.S.R., I visited Tbilisi, and was immediately struck by the vitality
and independent spirit of the Georgian people. A few years later, the
Georgian people were in the forefront of the movement to free the
captive nations of the Soviet Union. We supported their desire for
independence then, and we continue to support it today.
The United States stands firm in its commitment to Georgia's
sovereignty, territorial integrity, and independence. We condemn the
ongoing occupation of Georgia's Abkhazia and South Ossetia regions by
Russian forces. Furthermore, Russia's so-called ``treaties'' of
alliance with the de facto authorities Abkhazia and South Ossetia have
absolutely no legitimacy.
An important principle is at stake here--the right of all sovereign
nations to choose their own alliances and associations. The United
States and our allies support Georgia's Euro-Atlantic aspirations,
including NATO membership and EU integration. No third party has the
right to veto those aspirations. If confirmed, I look forward to
working with the Georgian Government and my Embassy colleagues in
realizing these aspirations. I will also urge all Georgians who believe
in their country's Euro-Atlantic goals to unite in supporting them and
moving their country forward.
On its road toward Euro-Atlantic integration, Georgia has made
substantial progress toward becoming a fully democratic state. Its 2012
and 2013 elections resulted in the first constitutional changes of
government in post-Soviet Georgia. While progress has been real and
substantial, more work needs to be done for Georgia to realize its goal
of an environment fully conducive to political pluralism. We will work
with all parties in Georgia to help ensure the next parliamentary
elections are the freest and fairest in Georgia's history. The U.S. has
been a partner in this effort, with a robust assistance program to help
Georgia strengthen accountable government, and consolidate its
democratic institutions.
If Georgia's quest to integrate with the West is to succeed, it is
critical that it improve the climate for trade and investment. This is
an area where the government and the opposition should be able to come
together. Georgia needs to take advantage of the great opportunity that
its Association Agreement with the European Union represents--
particularly increased trade between Georgia and Europe through the
Agreement's Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area. The United States
appreciates Georgia's growing role as a regional business, trade and
logistics hub, and its contributions to the revitalization of East-West
trade routes along the New Silk Road, connecting European and Asian
markets. If confirmed, I will support Georgia's focus on the future,
particularly economic development, to create jobs and contribute to the
long term stability of the country and the region.
Mr. Chairman, there is a lot of work to do, and if the Senate
confirms my nomination, I look forward to rolling up my sleeves and
getting down to it, advancing the mutual interests of the American and
Georgian peoples. Thank you, and I welcome your questions.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ambassador Kelly.
Our next nominee is Mrs. Nancy Pettit. Am I pronouncing
that right? Good. I am generally bad about that 30 percent of
the time. [Laughter.]
Mrs. Pettit is our nominee for Ambassador to Latvia. She is
currently the Director of the Western European Affairs Office
within the State Department and is a career Foreign Service
officer. Mrs. Pettit's past positions include the Director of
Policy Planning and Coordination of the State Department's
Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement and
positions at posts in Kiev, Moscow, and Vienna.
Mrs. Pettit.
STATEMENT OF NANCY BIKOFF PETTIT, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA
Ms. Pettit. 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 U.S. Ambassador to the Republic
of Latvia.
I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry
for the confidence and trust they have placed in me. If
confirmed by the Senate, I pledge to devote my time, energy,
and expertise to advancing America's interests in Latvia and
strengthening relations between our two countries. I commit
myself to working closely with the committee, your staffs, and
your congressional colleagues to build on our shared interest
in a strong and vibrant U.S.-Latvian partnership.
I would like to thank my family, friends, and colleagues
for providing encouragement and support throughout my career.
In particular, special thanks to my husband, Jim, the current
Ambassador to Moldova; daughters, Sarah and Liz Pettit; and
son-in-law, Josh Katzenstein, who are watching this online. I
would like to introduce my sisters, Ellen Phipps and Barbara
Bikoff, and brother, Russ Bikoff, who are here with me today.
Thank you for coming.
I have spent the bulk of my 33-year career as a public
servant working on issues related to Europe and Transatlantic
relations. From my early days as a desk officer in the Office
of Soviet Union Affairs to my most recent position as Director
of the Office of Western European Affairs, I have devoted my
professional life to advancing our shared vision of a Europe
that is whole, free, and at peace. I believe these experiences
have prepared me well to lead our mission in Riga, and, if
confirmed, continue our work with the Republic of Latvia on a
forward-looking, ambitious global agenda.
The United States and Latvia share a long history of
friendship and cooperation. From the darkest days of the Soviet
occupation through the end of the cold war, the United States
commitment to the Latvian people never wavered. Following the
restoration of Latvia's independence in 1991, the country
embarked on an ambitious path toward Euro-Atlantic integration,
joining NATO and the EU in 2004, adopting the Euro in 2014, and
setting a powerful example for other countries aspiring to be
free.
As allies, United States and Latvian troops have fought
together and died together in Iraq and Afghanistan. Through our
cooperation in Afghanistan, Latvia has become one of only seven
countries certified as Joint Terminal Attack Controllers who
provide essential targeting expertise for NATO combat missions.
With U.S. support, Latvia has also increased its development
assistance to countries around the world. Whether it is
contributing humanitarian assistance to fight the spread of
ebola or supporting international efforts to combat ISIL,
Latvia has always stepped up to the plate.
Without a doubt, Russia's continued aggression in Ukraine
has challenged the vision of a Europe that is whole, free, and
at peace, threatening the security of Latvia and all of our
regional allies. This is why the United States has deployed
company-sized units to Poland and the three Baltic States since
April 2014 under Operation Atlantic Resolve. Through President
Obama's $1 billion European Reassurance Initiative, we will
maintain this rotational presence for as long as necessary, and
fund military infrastructure improvement projects. These
efforts embody the United States commitment to Latvia's
security under NATO's article 5.
Meanwhile, Latvia has enacted legislation to meet its NATO
defense spending commitment of 2 percent of GDP by 2020, and is
using its role as the current EU-presidency country to maintain
international pressure on Russia while also offering Moscow a
diplomatic off-ramp, should it choose peace over further
escalation. Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate, I will
continue to grow our partnership with Latvia to the benefit of
our shared security and prosperity.
Latvia has made advancing the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership, TTIP, a top priority. If confirmed, I
will work with my Latvian counterparts to build Latvian support
for a comprehensive TTIP agreement that boosts economic growth,
creates jobs, and sets a new standard for trade that reflects
our shared values.
While Latvia has made great strides over the past 20 years
implementing democratic reforms and rule of law, I believe more
work needs to be done in the areas of combating corruption,
addressing Holocaust-era legacies, such as Jewish communal
property restitution, and taking advantage of Latvia's rich
cultural diversity.
Almost 25 years ago, Latvia emerged from captivity seeking
the democracy, prosperity, and security that we in the
transatlantic community have enjoyed for nearly seven decades.
Through sheer determination, sacrifice, and an enduring
commitment to the principles of freedom, the Latvian people
persevered and succeeded in building a vibrant, flourishing
democracy. If confirmed, I promise to further enrich the bonds
between our countries and continue confronting global
challenges together as close partners and NATO allies.
Thank you again for the privilege of appearing before you
today, and I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Pettit follows:]
Prepared Statement of Nancy Bikoff Pettit
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 U.S. Ambassador to the Republic of Latvia. I am deeply
grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry for the confidence and
trust they have placed in me in this nomination. If confirmed by the
Senate, I pledge to devote my time, energy, and expertise to advancing
America's interests in Latvia and strengthening the relations between
our two countries. I also commit myself to working closely with the
committee, your staffs, and your congressional colleagues to build on
our shared interest in a strong and vibrant U.S.-Latvian partnership.
I have spent the bulk of my 33-year career as a public servant
working on issues related to Europe and trans-Atlantic relations. From
my early days as a desk officer in the Office of Soviet Union Affairs
to my most recent position as Director of the Office of Western
European Affairs, I have devoted a considerable amount of my life to
advancing our shared vision of a Europe whole, free, and at peace. I
believe these experiences have prepared me well to lead our mission in
Riga and--if confirmed--continue our work with the Republic of Latvia
on a forward-looking and ambitious global agenda.
The United States and Latvia share a long history of unbroken
friendship and cooperation. From the darkest days of the Soviet
occupation through the end of the cold war, the United States
commitment to the Latvian people never wavered. Following the
restoration of Latvia's independence in 1991, Latvia embarked on an
ambitious path toward euro-Atlantic integration: joining NATO and the
EU in 2004; adopting the euro in 2014; and setting a powerful example
for other countries aspiring to be free.
Today, Latvia is one of our most reliable and valued partners. As
allies, U.S. and Latvian troops have fought together and died together
in Iraq and Afghanistan. Through our cooperation in Afghanistan, Latvia
has become one of only seven countries that are certified as Joint
Terminal Attack Controllers (JTAC), providing essential targeting
expertise for NATO combat missions. With U.S. support, Latvia has also
increased its development assistance to countries around the world. For
example, through the State Department's Emerging Donors Challenge Fund,
the United States and Latvia are cofinancing a project in Uzbekistan to
enhance export control and border security capabilities. Whether it is
contributing humanitarian assistance to fight the spread of Ebola or
supporting international efforts to combat ISIL, Latvia has always
stepped up to the plate. In short, Latvia is a global partner of first
resort.
Without a doubt, Russia's continued aggression in Ukraine has
challenged the vision I referenced earlier of a Europe whole, free, and
at peace, threatening the security of Latvia and all of our allies in
the region. This is why the United States has deployed company-sized
units to Poland and the three Baltic States since April 2014 under
Operation Atlantic Resolve. Through President Obama's $1 billion
European Reassurance Initiative (ERI), we will sustain this persistent,
rotational presence for as long as necessary.ERI will also fund
military infrastructure improvement projects, including at Latvia's
Lielvarde airbase and Adazi training grounds. These efforts embody the
United States commitment to Latvia's security under NATO's Article 5.
Meanwhile, Latvia has enacted legislation to meet its NATO defense
spending commitment of 2 percent of GDP by 2020 and is using its role
as the current rotating EU Presidency country to maintain international
pressure on Russia, while also offering Moscow a diplomatic off-ramp
should it choose peace over further escalation.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed by the Senate, I will continue to grow
our partnership with Latvia to the benefit of our shared security and
prosperity. Latvia has made advancing the Transatlantic Trade and
Investment Partnership (TTIP) a top priority of its EU Presidency. If
confirmed, I will work hand in hand with my Latvian counterparts to
build Latvian support for a comprehensive TTIP agreement that boosts
economic growth, creates jobs, and sets the global gold standard for
trade that reflects our shared values. In 2014, bilateral trade in
goods between the United States and Latvia totaled $702 million. While
significant, I think there is a tremendous potential to further
cultivate our economic ties. If confirmed, I will work to increase our
bilateral trade and investment. While Latvia has made great strides
over the past 20 years implementing democratic reforms and rule of law,
I believe more work needs to be done in the areas of combating
corruption, addressing Holocaust-era legacies such as Jewish communal
property restitution, and taking advantage of Latvia's rich cultural
diversity.
Almost 25 years ago, Latvia reemerged from captivity seeking the
democracy, prosperity, and security that we in the transatlantic
community have enjoyed for almost seven decades. Through sheer
determination, sacrifice, and an enduring commitment to the principles
of freedom, the Latvian people persevered and succeeded in building a
vibrant, flourishing democracy. If confirmed, I promise to further
enrich the bonds between our countries and to continue confronting
global challenges together, as close partners and NATO allies. Thank
you again for the privilege of appearing before you today, and I look
forward to answering your questions.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mrs. Pettit.
Our next nominee is Ms. Azita Raji. She is our nominee for
Ambassador to Sweden. Ms. Raji has served as a member of the
President's Commission on White House Fellowships since 2013.
She is also trustee of Barnard College and a member of the
advisory board of the Social Enterprise Program at Columbia
Business School. As a former investment banker, Ms. Raji
specialized in European emerging markets.
Ms. Raji.
STATEMENT OF AZITA RAJI, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF SWEDEN
Ms. Raji. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Shaheen, and
Senator Kaine.
I would like to begin by recognizing my parents for their
wisdom, strength, and encouragement--which are fundamental to
my being here today. I am deeply grateful to my husband, Gary
Syman, who is here. And four out of our five daughters are
here, and I am grateful to all of them. Our son-in-law, and
especially our grandson, Theo--7-year-old Theo is here. And I
have to admit that I am a little bit nervous today, because I
really have not had a chance to prepare for his questions,
which will undoubtedly come afterward. [Laughter.]
Ms. Raji. I am here as a woman whose family endured the
life-altering upheaval of the Iranian Revolution and found new
hope and new life in the United States of America. Throughout
my life, while working or studying in countries as different as
Iran, Switzerland, Japan, and the United States, I arrived at
the realization that I had been, in principle and sensibility,
quintessentially American all along. So, I have never taken for
granted the freedom to speak my mind, the protection of the
rule of law, or our belief in unity within diversity, which is
expressed in our country's de facto motto, E Pluribus Unum.
That is the belief that has made me effective in what I have
chosen to do in business, in philanthropy, in the political
arena, and even in my own family life.
So, it is specially meaningful for me to find myself here
before this distinguished committee, trusted by President Obama
and Secretary Kerry to represent the United States of America,
and to be asked to do so in Sweden, a valued partner and close
friend of the United States, but also a country where respect
for the rule of law, individual freedoms, human dignity, and
gender equality are hallmarks of national identity and defining
pillars of government policy.
So, if confirmed, I pledge and look forward to working
closely with you to enhance our cooperation with Sweden by
focusing on four priorities:
First, Sweden is an engaged and effective partner of the
United States and NATO in promoting global peace and security.
Our close cooperation in Ukraine as it fights against Russian
aggression and seeks to implement ambitious reforms is vital
and greatly appreciated. Elsewhere, whether in Africa,
Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Kosovo, or in fighting ISIL,
corruption, and global terrorism, Sweden is a valued and
reliable partner. So, if confirmed, I will work to further
strengthen our bilateral partnership with Sweden in security,
as well as supporting their cooperation with NATO.
Second, as a strong and long-standing economic partner of
the United States--Sweden is the 11th-largest direct foreign
investor and one of the fastest growing and largest investors
per capita in the United States. Our economic partnership with
Sweden supports over 190,000 American jobs. And, if confirmed,
I will continue our focus on promoting bilateral trade and
investment, specially focusing on emerging industries like
clean energy, biotech, and information technologies.
Third, we have a very strong cooperation on environmental
issues with Sweden, including our cooperation in the
increasingly important Arctic region. If confirmed, I will
continue our focus on addressing environmental challenges with
Sweden, stewardship of the Arctic region, and scientific
research. I also look forward to engaging with our Swedish
partners both in the private sector and the government, to
explore opportunities to leverage Sweden's energy leadership in
the EU and its global leadership in environmental and clean
energy technologies to advance our shared interest in an energy
secure Europe.
Fourth, our friendship with Sweden is anchored in the close
affinity between our peoples and the shared commitment that we
have to democratic ideals and institutions around the world.
That is manifested through our development cooperation, where
Sweden is a strong and global leader, and we advance our
interests in democracy promotion, human rights, gender
equality, governance, and transparency around the world. There
are--today there are 4 million Americans in the United States
who claim a Swedish descent. They contribute to our culture and
society and have been part of our economic development and
success from the beginning by building successful companies,
such as Nordstrom, Walgreens, and Greyhound. If confirmed, I
will dedicate myself to advance this enduring friendship by
taking a multistakeholder approach to developing partnerships
outside of the government between our peoples and institutions
and leveraging technology and public-private partnerships to
reach new audiences.
Finally, we have an excellent, strong, dedicated, and
talented Embassy team in Stockholm. And, if confirmed, I look
forward to working with them and facilitating their continued
success and being their biggest advocate. Their safety, as well
as that of all Americans, will be my first priority, and most
important priority.
Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Raji follows:]
Prepared Statement of Azita Raji
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Shaheen, and distinguished
members of the committee.
I would like to begin by recognizing my parents for their wisdom,
strength, and encouragement, which are fundamental to my being here
today. I am grateful to my husband, Gary Syman, for his unwavering
support, and to our five daughters and seven grandchildren, for the joy
and inspiration they bring me.
I appear before you as a woman whose family endured the life-
altering upheaval of the Iranian Revolution, and found new hope and new
life in the United States of America. Throughout my life, while living,
studying or working in countries as different as Iran, Switzerland,
Japan, Italy, France, and the United States, I arrived at the
realization that I had been, in principle and sensibility,
quintessentially American all along. And so, I have never taken for
granted the freedom to speak my mind, the protection of the rule of
law, and the opportunities to benefit from the similarities and
differences that create the transformative mosaic that is America. Our
country's de facto motto, E Pluribus Unum, speaks to our belief in
unity within diversity, a belief that has made me effective in what I
have chosen to do in business, in philanthropy, in the political arena,
and even in my own family life. And it also speaks to a world that in
its differing views has never been in greater need of commonality,
kinship, and partnership.
Which is why it is an especially meaningful honor for me to find
myself here, before this distinguished committee, and to have the trust
of President Obama and Secretary Kerry to represent and serve the
United States of America, and to be asked to do so in Sweden, an
important partner and close friend of the United States and a country
where respect for the rule of law, individual freedoms, human dignity
and gender equality are hallmarks of national identity and defining
pillars of government policy.
If confirmed, I pledge to serve our country to the best of my
ability and to work closely with you to deepen the friendship and
expand the cooperation between the United States and Sweden. I will
focus on four priorities.
First, security challenges. Sweden is an engaged and effective
strategic partner of the United States and NATO in promoting global
peace and security. Our close cooperation with Sweden in support of
Ukraine, as it fights against Russian aggression and seeks to implement
ambitious reforms, is vital and greatly appreciated. Elsewhere, whether
in Afghanistan (where Sweden made significant contributions to the ISAF
mission, and currently provides assistance to Resolute Support Mission
and support to Afghan democracy), or Africa (where Sweden is one of the
largest contributors to Power Africa and to the global fight against
Ebola), or Syria, Iraq, and Kosovo, or in fighting ISIL, global
terrorism and corruption, Sweden is valued and respected as a reliable
partner in advancing peace. If confirmed, I will seek to further
strengthen our bilateral cooperation in addressing regional and global
security challenges, and to support Sweden's partnership with NATO.
Second, economic prosperity. As a strong and long-standing economic
and trading partner since 1783, Sweden is the 11th-largest direct
investor and one of the fastest growing and largest investors per
capita in the United States. Our economic partnership supports over
190,000 American jobs across 50 States. If confirmed, I will continue
our focus on promoting bilateral trade and investment opportunities,
particularly in emerging industries, such as information technology,
biotech, and clean energy.
Today our economic focus must not just be bilateral, but also
multilateral. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership is an
important building block of the wider trade policy agenda between the
EU and the United States and will be an important focus of our work in
the coming months. Sweden is a strong supporter of TTIP and a logical
partner in this effort, having relied on free trade to become one of
the world's most globalized, competitive, and innovative modern
industrial economies. If confirmed, I will encourage Sweden to
highlight and leverage its economic success in creating prosperity
through trade to promote our shared objective of a comprehensive TTIP
agreement.
Third, environmental challenges. The United States and Sweden have
an active partnership on environmental and climate change issues,
including our close cooperation in the increasingly important Arctic
region. Sweden chaired the Arctic Council from 2011 to 2013, and its
accomplishments included a historic marine oil pollution preparedness
and response agreement. The United States assumed chairmanship of the
Arctic Council in April 2015. If confirmed, I will prioritize our
continued bilateral cooperation on environmental and climate change
issues, stewardship of the Arctic region, and scientific research. As a
global leader in environmental sustainability and clean energy
technologies, Sweden derives more than half of its energy from
renewable sources, making it less dependent on energy imports than most
EU countries. If confirmed, I will engage with our partners in Swedish
Government and private sector to explore innovative ways to leverage
Sweden's energy leadership in the EU to advance our shared priorities
in addressing climate change and European energy security.
Fourth, shared values. Our growing friendship with Sweden remains
anchored in the genuine affinity between our peoples and our strong
commitment to democratic values and institutions, a commitment
expressed in our global partnership to protect and advance human rights
and civil society. It is a friendship based on a shared heritage that
dates back to 1638, when the first generation of Swedish immigrants
arrived on the shores of what is now the State of Delaware. Today over
4 million Americans claim Swedish descent. They continue to enrich our
culture and society and have been part of our economic success from the
beginning, by building such successful companies as Walgreens,
Greyhound, and Nordstrom. If confirmed, I will dedicate myself to
deepen this enduring friendship, by encouraging understanding of our
similarities and respectful debating of our differences, and by taking
a multistakeholder approach to building innovative partnerships outside
the government between our peoples and institutions and leveraging
technology and public-private partnerships to connect with new
audiences.
Finally, if confirmed, I look forward to meeting the talented and
dedicated professionals of our Embassy in Stockholm. I will support
their continued success and be their biggest advocate, as we work side
by side to advance our vision of a deeper friendship and stronger
partnership between the United States and Sweden. The safety and
security of our team, and that of all Americans in Sweden, will always
remain my top priority.
Thank you very much for your consideration. I look forward to your
questions.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Raji.
Now, our next nominee is Ms. Julieta Noyes. She is our
nominee to become Ambassador to Croatia. Ms. Noyes currently
serves as Deputy Assistant Secretary within the Bureau of
European and Eurasian Affairs at the State Department, and is a
career member of the Foreign Service. Her past positions
include Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy to the Holy
See and Director of the Office of Multilateral and Global
Affairs at the State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human
Rights, and Labor.
Ms. Noyes.
STATEMENT OF JULIETA VALLS NOYES, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA
Ms. Noyes. Mr. Chairman, Senator Shaheen, Senator Kaine, it
is a privilege to appear before you today as President Obama's
nominee to be Ambassador to the Republic of Croatia.
I am honored by the confidence placed in me by the
President and by Secretary Kerry. If confirmed, I look forward
to working with this committee and with the Congress to advance
United States-Croatian relations.
I am a first-generation American, the daughter of Cuban
refugees who had to come to this country to build a new life.
And I am profoundly grateful for the opportunity to repay that
debt with service to our great Nation.
It is a personal pleasure for me to be here with my
husband, Nick, a recently retired Foreign Service officer, and
our children, Alexandra, Nicholas, and Matthew. With 30 years
as a Foreign Service family, we have many happy memories of
times spent together overseas and here at home.
For the last 2 years, I have managed U.S. relations with
the European Union and worked on trade, energy, security, and
other issues with the EU. I have also overseen the work of U.S.
Embassies in 15 Western European countries, managing a broad
range of political, economic, security, and consular issues,
and doing broad outreach. My work with nine NATO countries on
security issues and defense sales has provided valuable lessons
that I would apply, if confirmed, as the Ambassador in Croatia.
As Deputy Chief of Mission to the Holy See, I learned how
to engage the Catholic leadership, which is important in
Croatia. And in all my assignments, I have worked hard to
develop and empower my teams to foster high performance and
high morale. I would do the same in Zagreb.
Mr. Chairman, our bilateral relationship with Croatia is
strong and productive. Just last week, Assistant Secretary
Victoria Nuland met with Foreign Minister Vesna Pusic to
discuss how our partnership can advance our many common
interests. In April, Embassy Zagreb and private-sector partners
hosted the fifth Brown Forum in Croatia, a regional conference
convened to focus on how to spur entrepreneurship and increase
trade and investment between our countries and with the region.
Croatia has come a long way since its hard-won
independence, becoming a NATO member in 2009 and the European
Union's 28th and newest member in 2013. The citizens of Croatia
deserve warm congratulations for all that they have achieved.
And Croatia has generously shared the lessons that it has
learned assisting its western Balkan partners and neighbors in
their aspirations for Euro-Atlantic integration. We encourage
the Government of Croatia to press forward and, in so doing,
help address the remaining bilateral and regional legacies of
the Balkans conflict.
Croatia is an active and committed EU member. A Croatian
commissioner leads the EU's work on international cooperation
and development. Croatian members of the European Parliament
serve on the critical budget, economic, foreign affairs, and
other committees. Croatia's leaders have endorsed a U.S./EU
Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.
As a reliable NATO ally, Croatia makes valued contributions
to global security. We appreciate its commitment, first, to the
international Security Assistance Force and now the Resolute
Support Mission in Afghanistan, as well as to the Kosovo Force,
where Croatia provides valuable helicopter lift support.
Croatia is a member of the global coalition to fight ISIL, and
it was among the first countries to send observers into Crimea,
and continues to provide monitors in eastern Ukraine for the
OSCE mission. Brave Croatian men and women are serving in 11
peacekeeping missions around the world.
Croatia now enjoys a mature democratic society, yet there
is more to be done. It continues to be challenged by sluggish
growth and far too high unemployment. The Croatian Government
has recognized the urgent need for reforms to welcome business
investment, eradicate excessive redtape, and increase
transparency and predictability for businesses.
If confirmed, I will seek to further solidify our
partnership with Croatia, building on the exemplary work of our
outgoing Ambassador and my good friend Ken Merten and our
terrific country team in Zagreb.
As Ambassador, I will promote several interconnected
priorities in Croatia: fostering economic growth and
prosperity, helping Croatia realize its potential to become a
regional energy hub, strengthening the capabilities of a
willing security partner, and advancing regional stability. If
confirmed, I will encourage Croatia's contributions to U.S.-EU
relations in pivotal areas, such as transatlantic trade, energy
security, and collaboration in the digital sphere. I will also
actively uphold our strategic alliance in NATO, the Resolute
Support Mission in Afghanistan, the Counter-ISIL Coalition, and
more.
Mr. Chairman, Senator Shaheen, Senator Kaine, thank you for
this opportunity to appear before you. I would welcome any
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Noyes follows:]
Prepared Statement of Julieta Valls Noyes
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 Croatia. I am honored by
the confidence placed in me by the President and Secretary Kerry. If
confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and the
Congress in advancing U.S. interests in Croatia.
I am a first generation American, the daughter of Cuban refugees
who built a new home in the United States, and I am profoundly grateful
for the opportunity to repay that debt with service to our great
country. It is a personal pleasure to be accompanied today by my
husband, Nick, a recently retired Foreign Service officer, and our
children, Alexandra, Nicholas, and Matthew. As a Foreign Service family
of 30 years we treasure many happy memories from our time living in
Italy, Panama, Spain, Guatemala, and Mexico, as well as here at home.
For the last 2 years, I have managed U.S. relations with the
European Union and have worked on trade, energy, security, and other
issues in the EU. I also have overseen the work of 12 U.S. embassies
and 19 consulates, covering 15 Western European countries, managing a
broad range of political, economic, security, and consular issues, and
carrying out outreach to publics and governments. My work with nine
NATO members on security issues, defense sales, and participation in
the Pentagon's review of force realignment in Europe has provided me
useful lessons for directing the mission in Croatia. As Deputy Chief of
Mission at our Embassy to the Holy See, I learned how to engage the
Catholic leadership, which is important in Croatia. In all my
assignments, I have worked hard to develop and empower my teams, and to
foster high performance and strong morale; I would do the same in
Zagreb.
Our bilateral relationship with Croatia is strong and productive.
Just last week, Assistant Secretary Victoria Nuland met with Foreign
Minister Vesna Pusic to discuss how our partnership can advance our
many common interests. In April, the United States Embassy and private
sector partners hosted the fifth Brown Forum in Croatia, a regional
conference convened to focus on how to spur entrepreneurship and
increase trade and investment between the United States, Croatia, and
the region.
Croatia has come a long way since its hard-won independence,
becoming a NATO member in 2009 and the European Union's 28th and newest
member in 2013. The citizens of Croatia deserve warm congratulations
for all they have accomplished. And Croatia has generously shared the
lessons it has learned, assisting its western Balkan neighbors in their
aspirations for Euro-Atlantic integration. The United States supports
the strides Croatia has made toward nurturing regional cooperation. We
encourage the Croatian Government to continue to press forward and, in
so doing, help address the remaining bilateral and regional legacies of
the Balkans conflict.
Croatia is an active and committed EU member. A Croatian
Commissioner leads the EU's important work on international cooperation
and development. Croatian members of the European Parliament
participate on the critical Budget, Economic, Foreign Affairs and other
committees. Croatia's leaders have endorsed a U.S.-EU Transatlantic
Trade and Investment Partnership, or TTIP.
As a reliable NATO ally, Croatia makes valued contributions to
global security. We appreciate its commitment to the former
International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and now in the Resolute
Support Mission in Afghanistan, and in the Kosovo Force (KFOR), where
Croatia provides vital helicopter lift support. Croatia is a member of
the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL. It was among the first countries
to send OSCE observers into Crimea, and continues to provide monitors
for eastern Ukraine. Brave Croatian men and women are participating in
11 peacekeeping missions around the world.
Croatia now enjoys a mature democratic society, yet there is more
to be done. It continues to be challenged by sluggish growth and far-
too-high unemployment. The Croatian Government has recognized the
urgent need for reforms to welcome business investment, eradicate
excessive redtape, and increase transparency and predictability for
businesses. The United States will support Croatian reforms that lead
to sustainable economic growth and prosperity. We want to strengthen
the foundation for mutual economic expansion and trade relations.
If confirmed, I will seek to further solidify our partnership with
Croatia, building on the exemplary work of our outgoing Ambassador and
my good friend, Ken Merten, and our country team in Zagreb. As
Ambassador, I will promote several interconnected priorities in
Croatia: championing economic growth and prosperity, helping Croatia
realize its potential to become a regional energy hub, strengthening
the capabilities of a willing security partner, and fostering regional
stability. My experience working directly with the European Union and
its western European members has afforded me insights into our highest
objectives with Europe. If confirmed, I will foster Croatia's
contributions to U.S.-EU relations in pivotal areas such as the
transatlantic trade deal, energy security, and collaboration between
our countries in the digital sphere. I will also actively uphold our
strategic alliance in NATO, the Resolute Support Mission in
Afghanistan, the Counter-ISIL Coalition, the State Partnership Program
with the Minnesota National Guard, and more.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for this
opportunity to appear before you. I welcome any questions you may have.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Noyes.
Again, thank you all for your testimony and your
willingness to serve our Nation. I would also like to join our
ranking member, Senator Shaheen, in welcoming all of the family
members here in the committee room, as well as those watching
online.
So much of a country's success, whether it is for peace and
stability or otherwise, really relies on economic prosperity.
What I would like to do is go right down the panel, starting
with you, Mr. Delawie. I would like each nominee to talk about
the economic opportunities in the countries that you are going
to represent the United States to, as well as the economic
challenges. What is the greatest opportunity for cooperation
between your country and the United States?
Mr. Delawie.
Mr. Delawie. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Right now, the economic situation in Kosovo is improving.
It is one of the poorest countries in Europe. Gross domestic
product is about $7 billion a year. It has significant
challenges, as I outlined in my testimony, but it also has
significant opportunities. It has a very young population. It
has significant natural resources that remain largely untapped.
And it has a very, very talented population, which is
demonstrated by the fact that the biggest export of Kosovo is
its talented population that is elsewhere in--mostly in Western
Europe, and that is sending billions of dollars in remittances
home every year.
The opportunities for cooperation are, at present, limited
by corruption, which I addressed in my testimony. And that is
something that we have to work with the Kosovar Government to
address. And I will do so, certainly vigorously, if confirmed.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Delawie.
Ambassador Kelly.
Ambassador Kelly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that
question.
Our bilateral assistance program is very much focused on
trade and investment and enhancing opportunities for American
businesses to invest in Georgia. And we very much see a growing
economy as very much a part of our foreign policy priority
promoting stability and security in the region.
I think, in terms of the greatest opportunities for
Georgia, I think it is--I mentioned, already, its recent
agreement with the EU, to increase trade with the EU. And I
think that is a tremendous opportunity for Georgia. And also, I
think the--Georgia's strategic position as--between Asia and
Europe--and I think that it can really gain a lot from being
this East-West corridor for energy, in particular, but also for
transporting goods from Central Asia to Europe. And, if
confirmed, I look forward to working with you and with the
Congress in identifying more opportunities.
Thank you.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ambassador Kelly.
Mrs. Pettit.
Ms. Pettit. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
Deepening deepening trade and investment with Latvia is one
of the highest priorities in our relationship. Last year, our
total bilateral trade investment was about $700 million. If I
am confirmed, I will work to expand that.
In terms of opportunities, I think the Northern
Distribution Network, where Riga served as a hub for materiel
going to Afghanistan, could possibly be developed into a new
economic opportunity for Latvia. That is an area I would
explore with them, if confirmed.
Thank you.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mrs. Pettit.
Ms. Raji.
Ms. Raji. Thank you.
In many ways, we already have a very strong and long-
lasting trade and investment partnership with Sweden that goes
back to 1783. We have a robust--as I mentioned earlier, they
are a strong foreign investor in the United States, and we have
a--strong trade relationships.
Bilaterally, the opportunities lie in looking at industries
where there is potential. For example, in the smart-grid
industry in the United States, we are one of the leaders--
export leaders--I think, the third-leading export leader of
transmission and distribution equipment, electrical equipment.
It is an area that was identified by the National Export
Initiative as an area of high growth and potential for the
United States to grow. Because of the interest,
internationally, in investing in dated electricity
infrastructure, that is an area that we can explore with Sweden
that they possibly could be interested, as well as energy
efficiency in the built environment. So, that is just to pick
one sector.
Sweden presents a successful example in building prosperity
through trade. It has managed to transform its once
agricultural society over the last 150 years into one of the
world's most prosperous, competitive, and innovative modern
industrials economies, largely relying on trade, where it is
now over 50 percent of its GDP.
So, we will explore the bilateral opportunities. But, I
think there is also a multilateral opportunity. Because of
Sweden's strong example in building prosperity through trade, I
will look for opportunities to explore with our Swedish
partners to see how we can highlight and leverage that strong
example in Europe in reaching our shared objective of a
Transatlantic and Pacific partnership.
And finally, I want to just say that my background in
business and finance, especially in emerging markets, have made
me realize the important connection between economic prosperity
and political stability and civil society. So, I share
Secretary Kerry's view that foreign policy is--economic policy
is foreign policy. And if confirmed, I will use my skills in
business and finance towards economic statecraft to open new
markets for the United States, encourage foreign investment in
the United States, and increase exports.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Raji.
Ms. Noyes.
Ms. Noyes. Thank you, Senator
Croatia has suffered from recession for the last 6 years,
and is only barely now coming to a position of positive growth.
Its unemployment rate ranges from about 18\1/2\ percent for the
general population to about 48 percent for youth. Its deficit
is 5.7 percent of GDP, and its debt-to-GDP ratio is about 85
percent. Clearly it has a lot of economic issues that it needs
to address in addition to its difficult investment climate.
But, Croatia also has some real advantages. It is
breathtakingly beautiful country, very attractive to tourists.
If confirmed, I hope that you will come to visit. [Laughter.]
Ms. Noyes. But, it is also--it has an enormously motivated,
educated population. Its recent admission into the European
Union has given it additional resources and expertise that it
can draw upon. And Croatia also has energy resources of its
own. It is these energy resources that the Croatian government
is trying to expand on, in creating and making itself into a
regional energy hub.
If confirmed, I would seek to work with the Croatian
Government to tackle some of these very difficult economic
issues, working with our government here, but also with the
European Union and with Brussels and with other countries in
the neighborhood, because a number of these are issues that
need to be tackled regionally.
Thank you.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Ms. Noyes.
Senator Shaheen.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Delawie, I had the opportunity to visit Kosovo in
February of 2010 on their Independence Day--their second
Independence Day. And I remember the people on the streets
waving flags from Kosovo and from America, thanking Americans.
It was very moving to see that.
I was very encouraged when I heard that there had been an
agreement reached between Kosovo and Serbia to lessen tensions
between the two countries. Can you give us an update on how the
relationship with Serbia is going and what additional progress
has been made since that accord was signed?
Mr. Delawie. Thank you very much, Senator Shaheen. And, if
confirmed, I certainly hope you will come back and see what has
changed since February of 2010.
The relationship between Kosovo and Serbia is going pretty
well. We are firm supporters of the EU-sponsored dialogue.
There was an agreement in 2013 that lead--is on a path toward
normalization of relations between the two countries. There has
been a lot of progress in the last couple of years. The police
are integrated now. The Serbs and Albanians are integrated in
the same police department. Judicial structures are merged. The
Serbian parallel courts in the northern chunk of the country
are no longer taking new cases. There are liaison offices
between the two countries. And the EU has been very
enthusiastic in helping to promote this, using the idea of a
potential path for both countries ultimately into EU
integration.
The new EU High Rep. Mogherini was in Kosovo, actually, in
March. She helped initiate some additional progress on judicial
issues. So, progress is going pretty well, and I think we can
all be happy of the role that the United States has played in
promoting that progress.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. I agree, I think we should be very proud
of that.
Can you also talk about the Serbian church? Because, as I
remember, one of the concerns was the fact that many of the
churches--Serbian churches were a concern, in terms of
potential protection in the future.
Mr. Delawie. That is certainly one of the issues the
Embassy in Pristina pays close attention to. They are talking
about it. Protecting the Serbian orthodox heritage in Kosovo is
certainly one of the key elements of this normalization
dialogue, something our Embassy pays close attention to. And,
as far as I know, that has been going relatively well. And I
believe the Embassy has even put some money from the
Ambassador's fund into remodeling and protecting some of the
Serbian orthodox churches in Kosovo.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you. That is very encouraging.
Ms. Noyes, can you--you mentioned the importance of Croatia
in the region, in the Balkans, in terms of its future economic
prosperity. Can you talk about what you, as Ambassador, would
be able to do to encourage economic prosperity with the region,
and also what the United States is doing to promote economic
prosperity?
Ms. Noyes. Thank you, Senator.
Yes. One of the things that Croatia is seeking to do is to
become a regional energy hub. It has resources of its own. It
provides about 60 percent of its own gas for domestic use, but
it also has a great geographic location and some infrastructure
that already exists that would allow it, if it could build an
LNG import terminal--and they are looking at building one on
the Krk Island--that would allow it to be a hub for the
exportation--or the importation of LNG, and then the
exportation to other countries in the region. This would not
only help with regional needs, but it would also reduce
reliance on Russian gas.
And Croatia has also been very engaged and active within
the EU and in NATO in advancing the Euro-Atlantic integration
of its partners, and seeking to have greater relations between
the EU and other countries in the Balkans.
So, if confirmed, I would certainly seek to promote both of
those objectives--the LNG terminal, the creation of the
regional energy hub--but also to support Croatia's advocacy and
its emphasis on making all of the countries of the Balkans
oriented toward the West, both in terms of their democratic
behavior, and their economic growth and their free-market
orientation.
Senator Shaheen. And to what extent has Croatia been
affected, or has it been affected, by the financial
difficulties in Greece?
Ms. Noyes. Well, Senator, Croatia and Greece are the only
two countries in the EU that have suffered from a recession for
the last 6 years. In each case--and I know this a bit on Greece
because of my current job, working with the European Union--
there are factors in each country that are specific to the
country, but there is no doubt that both countries were also
affected by the greater economic downturn in Europe. As we see
now with dropping energy prices--frankly, the drop in the value
of the Euro--we are starting to see growth turning around in
Europe. And, in fact, we are now seeing Croatia coming out of
the recession and doing better.
So, they are not necessarily linked to each other, but they
both have been affected by greater trends, as well as by
macroeconomic issues that they need to tackle independently,
both in Zagreb and in Athens.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Mr. Kelly, one of the issues that I have had the
opportunity to raise with Georgian officials when they have
been here is concern about the perception that arrests of some
former political leaders raise questions about the rule of law
and the judicial system in Georgia. And to what extent do you
think it is--what can we do, in the United States, to encourage
Georgia to continue to move forward with democracy and to
address the potential to see former political opponents as
subject to arrest, as opposed to what they are, which is former
political opponents?
Ambassador Kelly. Well, thank you very much for that
question.
Our top foreign policy priority for Georgia is helping it
attain its aspirations, join Euro-Atlantic institutions. And,
of course, we would not want to see anything degrade that
trajectory toward Euro-Atlantic integration. And in our
bilateral contacts, I know that Ambassador Norland has had many
good consultations with the Georgian Government, and we have
stressed the importance of not even having the perception of
any kind of political use of any kind of judicial levers.
Having said that, we also have a very strong cooperation
with Georgia to ensure that the judicial process, in all cases,
is transparent and accountable. And I think Georgia has made
great strides in ensuring the independence of the judiciary.
But, you have put your finger on one of the issues, that,
if you do confirm me, that I am going to keep a very close eye
on. So, thank you very much for raising that.
Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. And my time is up, but
let me just say how much I appreciate the close relationship
that America and Georgia have had, and their contributions to
our efforts in Afghanistan have been significant. So, I think
they have made tremendous progress, and want to see them
continue to succeed.
Ambassador Kelly. I second that. Thank you.
Senator Johnson. Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Noyes, you talked a little bit about the security
cooperation between the U.S. and Croatia. And I not--have not
been to Croatia, so, when my staff and I were digging--it is
pretty impressive. Croatia participates in U.N. peacekeeping
operations in the Golan Heights, Cyprus, Sudan, Liberia,
Lebanon, Western Sahara, and the Kashmir, supports NATO-led
Kosovo Force, and also the ISAF in Afghanistan. Kind of feel
funny saying that and saying, Are there things we can do to
even strengthen the relationship? I am very impressed with the
commitment of Croatia to peacekeeping through U.N. and other
multinational organizations. But, are there remaining
opportunities for us to deepen that tie?
Ms. Noyes. Thank you, Senator.
Yes, Croatia definitely punches above its weight on the
security front. It participates in 11 peacekeeping operations.
It is been with us in Afghanistan since 2003. It provided
ammunition and weapons to both Iraqi forces and the peshmerga.
It assisted with the removal of Syrian chemical weapons. And it
is absolutely a critical support to KFOR through its provision
of lift support.
That said, there is always more that can be done. And, if
confirmed, I would look forward to working further with the
forces in Croatia. One of the biggest priorities that we have
there is to help Croatia modernize its equipment. It still has
too much reliance on Soviet-era equipment, and still relies on
Russia for spare parts and, in some cases, servicing of that
equipment. So, one of my priorities, if confirmed, would be to
help Croatia modernize its forces and its equipment to make
them more interoperable with NATO forces, and to continue to
support the efforts of this very willing ally.
Senator Kaine. Great.
Ms. Raji, I look forward to working with you on the
economic issues. Virginia has a huge amount of direct
investment from Swedish companies. The only vehicle
manufacturing plant in Virginia is a Volvo truck plant in
Dublin, VA.
But, I want to ask you about something else. You talked a
little bit about the Arctic Council. I--this is something that
I was not too aware of before I came to the Senate, but the
United States has just taken on the chairmanship of the Arctic
Council for the coming year. Talk a little bit about
initiatives that you think the United States and Sweden can do
together as the Arctic really changes in its strategic
importance.
Ms. Raji. Senator, thank you for that question.
The Arctic region, in fact, is an area of increasing
importance. With the melting of the Arctic ice, there are new
opportunities and challenges in shipping, commerce, trade,
environmental protection, fishing, hunting, and the livelihood
and the living conditions of the 4 million indigenous Arctic
people that live there.
Correctly stated, we just took over the chairmanship of the
Arctic Council. We have a very strong partnership with Sweden
in the Arctic region and other environmental issues that I
mentioned. But, focusing on the Arctic Council, we have a
scientific cooperation with Sweden. We were cofounders of the
Clean Air and--Climate and Clean Air Coalition, which focuses
on reducing so-called short-lived climate pollutants, or black
carbon, which is a concern in the Arctic. And Sweden has
particular expertise and knowledge in that area. We cooperate
with them on that, and on that Council. Scientific research is
another area.
And, broadly speaking, I would say that we share the values
that the Arctic Council is the preeminent intergovernmental
forum for cooperation. The Arctic has always been a region of
no conflict and cooperation on scientific research and
environmental issues. And all of the members are interested in
maintaining that practical cooperation in our mutual goals.
Senator Kaine. Great. Thank you so much for that.
Ms. Pettit, I am interested in Latvia, with all of the
challenges we deal with on this committee with Russian
influence and their sort of more bellicose recent posture.
Latvia--I guess, 38 percent of Latvians claim Russian as their
mother tongue, and there are strong Russian cultural ties. What
is the view of the, kind of, Latvian population about Russian
expansionism in the Baltic region and elsewhere in Europe?
Ms. Pettit. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
As you said, there are a large number of Russian speakers
in Latvia. However, those Russian speakers are very supportive
of Latvia's participation in Euro-Atlantic institutions. For
example, the political party that represents these Russian
speakers believes that Latvia should be a member of the EU. And
there are many advantages to Latvia and all Latvians being
members of the EU.
I think one of the areas of concern is Russian propaganda.
The Latvian Government is addressing this issue. They are
addressing it by increasing the number of Russian-language TV
programs. They have a new television studio for their Russian-
language programs. The United States is working closely with
Latvia on this. VOA and RFE/RL now have a nightly Russian
language program that is available online for Russian speakers
who are looking for objective, truth-based media. And I--if
confirmed--will continue to work with Latvia to address these
issues.
I think the message we have to share is--as Azita mentioned
and Julieta mentioned--is our strength through diversity. And
we have a great message to share with Latvia.
Thank you.
Senator Kaine. Thank you.
Mr. Kelly, talk a little bit about the delicate situation
that Georgia's in with Russia in the--a posture that they are
in, contrary to international law, on the two areas of Georgia
that you described. Georgia still has been a participant with
NATO in missions. I think there is one underway, or recently,
Noble Partner, on the borders of Russia, 300 American soldiers
accompanied by 14 Bradley tanks transported across the Black
Sea from Romania. NATO is scheduled to open a training center
in Georgia later this year. How does Georgia manage this with
the challenge with Russia now? And what can we do to shore them
up?
Ambassador Kelly. Thank you very much, Mr. Senator.
I think you actually identified one of the most tangible
examples of the way we are shoring up their aspirations to join
NATO, and that is the training exercises going on right now,
Noble Partner, where we have hundreds of American troops from
173rd Brigade who are helping the Georgians become
interoperable with the NATO Response Force. And that is a--it
is a real token of our support for this bedrock principle that
every nation has the right to choose its own alliances. And
Georgia has overwhelmingly chosen to join NATO.
So, much of our bilateral assistance, of course, is
designed to help Georgia become interoperable with NATO. You
also, I think, very sensitively pointed out the very difficult
position they are in, with 20 percent of their territory under
occupation and with the Russian troops there, digging in,
showing no signs of living up to the terms of the cease-fire
agreement in 2008 which called for Russian troops to return to
their previous positions. They are actually hardening the
border, putting up fences and surveillance cameras. They are
denying monitors from--the international community, like the EU
monitoring mission, from coming in, which was also agreed to in
the 2008 cease-fire.
And I think, in general, we have to keep saying, over and
over again, that we support their aspirations to integrate with
Europe--to join NATO, to integrate with the EU. And, of course,
we need to have tangible support, as well. And we are doing it.
The Congress has made Georgia one of the largest recipients of
foreign military financing. It is also one of the largest
recipients of IMET, the International Military Education and
Training. So, we really are, I think, you know, walking the
walk as well as talking the talk. And, if confirmed, I will, as
I say, continue to make this our priority, to support their
Euro-Atlantic aspirations.
Senator Kaine. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, could I ask Mr. Delawie just one brief question?
Thank you. I am over my time, but----
Mr. Delawie, I am curious about Kosovo, the number of
foreign fighters that go from Kosovo into the ISIL theater in
Syria and Iraq--per capita, among the highest in the world. I
am puzzled by that. Could you educate the committee about why
that is? What is it about Kosovo--it is geographic or sort of
ideological positioning that leads that to be the case?
Mr. Delawie. I do not think there is one easy answer,
Senator Kaine. They are--Kosovo is the poorest country in
Europe. Unemployment, around 40 percent; among youth, it is
probably in the neighborhood of 60 percent. So, there is this
economic factor. There are some--some people are going for
ideological reasons. Some people are going for excitement and
adventure, unfortunately. So, there are a variety of challenges
that Kosovo faces.
Fortunately, Kosovo passed a law, just 2 months ago, in
March, that would criminalize many of the aspects of going to
Syria and Iraq to join with ISIL. And we are working with the
Embassy in Pristina very hard with the justice authorities, the
police authorities, to train prosecutors, and to help the
government get a grip on the problem.
Senator Kaine. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Appreciate all of your testimony.
Senator Johnson. Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good to
see you in the Chair's spot. I enjoyed our 2 years sitting at
the head of this subcommittee.
And we have got a really fantastic group of nominees here
today, all going to very interesting countries, many of them in
transition. So, a few questions.
Maybe, Mr. Kelly, I will start with you to extend this
conversation about Georgia's future. So, I am a believer that
we are starting to compromise NATO's open-door policy without a
real, tangible plan for enlargement that includes Georgia,
understanding that it is a very difficult nut to crack with
respect to the occupied and contested territories. But, that
does not seem impossible. And so, I want to ask you, sort of,
What are the preconditions from our standpoint right now, from
the U.S.'s standpoint, as to what has to happen in order for
Georgia to get NATO membership? And do you foresee a
circumstance in which you could give the portion of Georgia
that is not contested, is not occupied, membership, or give a
type of membership with reservations concerning the extent of
the occupied and contested territories?
Ambassador Kelly. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Of course, you know NATO is a consensus organization with
all 28 members. I think, you know, the United States has a good
story to tell, in terms of our support for Georgia's desire to
join NATO. And I think that we really are doing a lot to help
them prepare for membership. And so, I think a lot of what we
have to do, and what we have to continue to do, because I think
the Embassy is already doing it, is highlighting what the
United States is doing, in terms of training Georgians, of
integrating them into NATO missions. But, you have--you know,
you have put your finger on the really hard part of it, of
course, which is the fact that Russia occupies 20 percent of
Georgia and has compromised its territorial integrity. And so,
I think that we just have to stay focused on the overall goal
of supporting Georgia in becoming more interoperable with NATO,
in reforming its defense institutions--and we have multiple
programs through State and through the Defense Department to do
that--and also be very steadfast in rejecting Russia's illegal
occupation of 20 percent of Georgia's territory.
Senator Murphy. But, does that not effectively result in
Russia having veto power over Georgia's accession to NATO? If
we do not hold out the possibility that there is a pathway for
them to join while the occupation continues, do we not
essentially put the decision in Russia's hands?
Ambassador Kelly. I do not think that Russia or any other
country has a veto on a country's desire to join NATO. We do
have good--I think, a good dialogue through NATO with Georgia,
through the NATO-Georgia Commission. I think that the path is
clear to any aspirant to join NATO. Obviously, the occupation
of South Ossetia and Abkhazia is a very difficult issue. But,
this overarching principle, that all countries should be able
to choose their own alliances and associations, is something
that has to be really defended, and the United States has to do
everything it can--and, of course, is doing everything it can--
to help Georgia realize its aspirations.
Senator Murphy. I think we have been halfhearted in our
attempts to lead the way to Georgia's membership in NATO. I
hope that we change at least the volume of our tune.
Mr. Delawie, you got big shoes to fill. Ambassador Jacobson
has done really important work for us at a very critical time.
I visited with her in Pristina last fall at a moment in which I
think she showed immense discretion in forcing the different
parties surrounding the government to make their own decisions
about a coalition moving forward, resisting the temptation that
sometimes comes with that position to get too involved.
I also visited the American University there, and one of
the answers to the question about the roots of extremism is a
real sense of hopelessness amongst young people in Kosovo, you
know, large numbers of youth unemployed and very little access
to higher education. The American University there is a unique
asset that provides a pathway into the middle class for young
people in Kosovo. I just hope that you will support their
mission, support the work that the new government is trying to
do to expand opportunities for higher education. It is really
a--it is really stunning, the lack of opportunities to get
advanced degrees in Kosovo. AUK is, right now, their best bet
to do that, but, hopefully, that experience can be modeled,
moving forward.
Mr. Delawie. Thank you very much, Senator.
I know Ambassador Jacobson has done an incredible job. And
I am looking forward to doing my best to fill her shoes. But,
it will be hard.
Fortunately, USAID has devoted a fair amount of resources
to supporting the access to higher education for Kosovar
citizens. You are right, there is a long way to go. And I
certainly agree with you about this--the hopelessness. We
have--we saw another example of that, not just in the ISIL
direction, but also, in the winter, there were a fair number of
Kosovo citizens who were attempting to emigrate, basically, to
Germany. Another symptom of that. So----
Senator Murphy. And I think we need to help the Kosovar
Government understand that this is not just about law
enforcement. They have really done some impressive things when
it is come to standing up law enforcement's capabilities. But,
they have, I think, got to understand the holistic strategy.
Just one question, Ms. Raji. Good to see you. I do not know
if this question has been asked, but--Sweden stepped up their
participation with NATO. They are obviously--have agreements
with NATO through memorandums of understanding for training and
military exercises. Important, given the forward positioning of
Russia in and around the region, to have that dialogue
continue. I assume that they are going to continue to be an
active participant with NATO in whatever joint exercises are
appropriate, and that we will encourage them to increase their
level of military integration so that we can send a coordinated
message, even with non-NATO partners, to Russia that, if they
are going to continue to run submarines and jet planes over our
friends' heads and to our friends' shores, that there is going
to be a coordinated response.
Ms. Raji. Great to see you, Senator Murphy, and thank you
for that question.
As you know, Sweden is not an ally of NATO, but it is one
of the--only five recently designated Enhanced Opportunities
Partners. It has made significant contributions to the missions
of NATO, and, in fact, other multilateral institutions, such as
the EU and the U.N. in peacekeeping and military exercises and
so forth.
With regard to NATO, Sweden currently has troops under
allied command in Kosovo and Afghanistan, and played a
significant role in protecting the no-fly zone in Libya in
2011. And it continues to increase, as you said, some of its
involvement with NATO in the exercises. For example, it joined
the NATO Response Force in 2013, which will enhance joint
capabilities. And it did sign an MOU for a Host Nation Support
Agreement in 2014, which will regulate exercises and military
transits on its soil, that has not been ratified, however.
We very much have a strong partnership with Sweden on NATO
missions. And, if confirmed, I will continue their cooperation
and partnership with NATO.
Senator Murphy. Great.
If I--just one quick question I forgot to ask Mr. Delawie.
The Riga summit starts tomorrow. There was an expectation that
there might be an extension of visa liberalization for Georgia
coming. It does not look like that may happen. I hope I--I ask
you whether it is going to be part of your mission to continue
to work with Georgia and with the Europeans to try to--I am
sorry--Mr. Kelly--I am sorry--to Mr. Kelly--although you can
respond to that question, as well, if you would like----
[Laughter.]
Senator Murphy [continuing]. Mr. Delawie. Be happy to know
what the Kosovar's Ambassador's position is on Georgia visa
liberalization. [Laughter.]
Mr. Kelly, what is the role that we can play in trying to
help them come to a better place on the question of visa
liberalization, vis-a-vis the European Union, post-Riga?
Ambassador Kelly. Yes, thank you very much.
Yes, as I said before, the--our--really, our top foreign
policy priority is to keep Georgia on a good trajectory. And I
think that it will be important that the Euro-Atlantic
community sends signals that Georgia is progressing on this
path. And I think this will help address some of the concerns
you mentioned before, obviously, about NATO's open door, too.
But, we--you know, a lot of our assistance program has been
sort of reoriented to help Georgia implement the terms of the
Association Agreement. And that is because it is really in our
U.S. national interests that Georgia become integrated into the
European Union and into European institutions, in general. So,
we can help them bilaterally, with the EU, obviously, in
pushing Georgia's case forward. But, we can also help them with
our bilateral assistance program. And I know that we are doing
that.
And if I am confirmed, I will make it a real priority to
ensure that that trajectory stays on a nice steep path toward
Euro-Atlantic integration. And, of course, that includes the
EU.
Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to
go over time.
Senator Johnson. Not a problem.
I am going to ask one other question before I close it out,
so did you have any further questions before----
Senator Murphy. That is okay.
Senator Johnson. Okay.
This question is really directed at Ambassador Kelly and
Mrs. Pettit, but if any of the other nominees have anything to
add, please do.
My first congressional delegation trip was in the spring of
2011, before I was on the Foreign Relations Committee, and we
visited Georgia, Ukraine, Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia. Back
in 2011, the representatives from all of those countries were
talking about what Russia was trying to do to undermine those
fledgling democracies.
We are seeing that, obviously, in spades today. I
personally do not think Vladimir Putin is looking for off-
ramps. I think Vladimir Putin is looking for on-ramps. I am
highly concerned about Latvia. I am not sure what he is going
to be doing in Georgia. I was up, by the way, right at the
border, and I was able to look through binoculars at the
Russians in the occupied areas.
The question I have is, What concerns do you have, in terms
of what Russia is doing in Latvia or within the region, to
undermine those democracies?
We will start with you, Mrs. Pettit.
Ms. Pettit. Thank you, Senator.
I do not think I can say it any better than President Obama
said it in Tallinn, right before the Wales summit in 2014, when
he said that the defense of Tallinn and Riga and Vilnius is as
important as the defense of Berlin, London, and Paris. And that
is our very strong message.
Latvia is our NATO ally. And, through our bilateral
security assistance and through our NATO activities--including
the Baltic air policing, the IMET program, our FMF program,
Section 2282, all of the Wales commitments that we are in the
process of implementing, the establishment of the command-and-
control unit in Latvia--each of the Baltic States will get a
command-and-control unit, the Very High Readiness Task Force
that is also being implemented--there is a lot going on. And I
think this sends a very strong message of deterrence.
Senator Johnson. Again, that is what we are doing----
Ms. Pettit. Right.
Senator Johnson. I am more interested, in terms of your
knowledge of what Russia is doing. And I will throw out there
the propaganda. I know I have gone over to Ukraine a couple of
times with Senator Murphy, and with the bipartisan delegations,
and it has always struck me how the Senators are shocked at how
effective Vladimir Putin and Russia's propaganda is without any
pushback, or virtually no pushback, on the part of the West.
Ms. Pettit. Well, I----
Senator Johnson. So, again, I guess I am looking just for
your knowledge of what Russia----
Ms. Pettit. Right.
Senator Johnson [continuing]. Is doing----
Ms. Pettit. There----
Senator Johnson [continuing]. To undermine----
Ms. Pettit. There is----
Senator Johnson [continuing]. The democracy.
Ms. Pettit. There is plenty of propaganda directed towards
Latvia's Russian-language speakers. This is absolutely true.
But, Latvia is addressing this issue. As I mentioned earlier,
they have greatly enhanced the number of TV news programs they
offer in the Russian language. Russian journalists are leaving
Russia and moving to Riga. For example, a former editor of one
of the biggest news platforms in Russia opened her own new
platform in Riga, where there is press freedom. And she has
gotten literally thousands and thousands of hits on her
Russian-language Web site. The BBG, here in the United States,
is working with--the Broadcasting Board of Governors--is
working with Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty and making
available new Russian-language programs online. Our goal is
provide objective, truth-based media to the Russian speakers in
Latvia. This is an issue of concern also within the EU. And I
believe, that shortly, the EU will also be working on this
matter and addressing this matter.
If I am confirmed, I will travel to the Russian-speaking
areas of Latvia and engage directly with this population. And I
think this is a great opportunity, again, to discuss or to
present the U.S. view that there is strength in diversity.
Senator Johnson. Okay, again, I am concerned with the
hybrid or ambiguous war. And obviously, propaganda is part of
that. Maybe the first part. But, there may be other actions
Russia might be taking.
Ambassador Kelly, are you aware of anything not even just
in Georgia, but elsewhere in the Baltic States or--that ring of
democracies around Russia? We obviously know it is happening in
Ukraine.
Ambassador Kelly. Yes, I--you know, as someone who has
followed Russia for many, many years, and am a bit of a Russia
media junkie, I am appalled by the kind of--well, let us just--
let us call it by its real name--by the lies that are being
spread about what our intentions are in supporting these
countries and about what Russia is actually doing in some of
these countries.
And in the case of Georgia, I think that they are ramping
up their outreach to Georgia, in terms of media. There are some
NGOs that are active in Georgia. And I think this gets back to
what Senator Murphy was talking about, about our concern about
the--maintaining the level of support within Georgia. And we do
not want to see that level fall. And so, we would be concerned
about messages that run contrary to our values, that we are
seeing in the Russian media. And we need to, as I say, ensure
that Georgians appreciate that we stand behind them in
supporting their desire to join NATO and to join European
institutions.
And I know that Ambassador Norland has been very active in
highlighting U.S. assistance for Georgia, in all of our public
pronouncements, highlighting our support for their territorial
integrity. And, as somebody who has dealt quite a bit in public
diplomacy, I, too, will relish being able to go around Georgia
and really show the Georgians that we are behind them.
Senator Johnson. Okay.
Any of the other nominees want to add anything on that
subject? Sure. Mr. Delawie.
Mr. Delawie. Thank you, Senator, just very briefly.
Two of the major streets in Kosovo, in Pristina, are named
George W. Bush Street and Bill Clinton Street. I do not think
there will be fertile ground for any--too much Russian
propaganda, in Kosovo at least.
Senator Johnson. We rely on you to make sure that remains
that way.
Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Mr. Chairman, one final question that I
meant to ask Ms. Noyes.
The Croatians are currently flying Russian-made helicopters
and are very interested in buying American-made Black Hawk
helicopters, something that I spoke to their Defense Minister
about when I was there, on the same trip where I visited
Pristina. Can you commit to us that you are going to work with
the Croatians to make a significant upgrade to their helicopter
fleet, such that they are no longer reliant on Russian
technology?
Ms. Noyes. Thank you, Senator.
I am delighted to report that this year we are working with
Croatia to get them some Kiowas. And I understand that
discussions are underway with regard to the Black Hawks. And,
if confirmed, I would be delighted to support those efforts.
Senator Murphy. Black Hawks are much better than Kiowas.
[Laughter.]
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
Again, I would like to thank all of our witnesses for your
testimony, for your thoughtful questions to our answers, and
for your willingness to serve this Nation. I would like to
thank your families for their willingness to support your
service to this Nation.
If there is anything we can, as a subcommittee of the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, do to help you succeed in
your mission as our Ambassadors to those countries, please let
us know. We really do not think often enough about how what
this committee says, what we do, and resolutions we may be able
to pass, how that can actually aid you. Think of this committee
and keep in communication with us. Again certainly wish you the
best.
With that, the record will remain open for questions and
statements until the close of business on Friday.
This hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
NOMINATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 17, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Gayle Smith, of Ohio, to be Administrator of the United States
Agency for International Development
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:03 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Corker, Risch, Johnson, Gardner, Perdue,
Cardin, Menendez, Coons, Murphy, Kaine, and Markey.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CORKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE
The Chairman. The committee will come to order.
And I am going to go ahead and get rolling, and I am sure
that Senator Cardin will be here in just a minute.
USAID oversees 20 billion dollar's worth of aid to over 100
countries. It is a very important organization. Gayle Smith,
who has been nominated, will have 18 months to have an impact
on this organization. And I will say that I think it is
beneficial that she has served with the President's National
Security Council and therefore inside the main building. She is
someone that is trusted and not coming from the outside, and I
know has been involved in these kinds of issues for a long,
long time.
I do hope that in your testimony you will talk about some
of the priorities that we have had here. I think you know the
committee passed out on a unanimous vote an effort to end
modern slavery. I know it is something that you for years have
been involved in and care about, but I hope you will speak to
that in your testimony.
I think you also know that there is a significant effort
underway to reform the Food for Peace program. I know we talked
about that some in our office. It is very important to many
members. I think you know that some of us share the belief that
it is a travesty that we are not serving the millions of people
that could be served by reforming this program and being held
hostage to various groups that benefit in ways that are not
beneficial to the people that we are trying to serve.
And then thirdly, Power Africa. There is a significant
effort underway to make sure that the millions of people that
do not have electricity even in their homes are able to do that
in Africa, in particular, as I mentioned. And in the past, we
have had some environmental issues that have said that, look,
it is more important. We would rather people not have any
electricity in their homes if it is going to produce 1 ounce of
carbon, which is not exactly, I think, a policy or a value that
most Americans adhere to. And I think we have been able to get
to a place that achieves a balance between the environmental
concerns, which I understand are real, but also the concern for
human beings. And hopefully, you will talk a little bit about
that.
I am glad that in your testimony you are going to refer to
the tremendous need to deal with the organizational issues
within the organization. This year we hope to pass into law a
State Department authorization. We passed it out of committee
unanimously last week. We are attempting, still, to deal with
that through NDAA. At some point we need to do the same with
USAID, but you internally will be able to do much.
So, I want to thank you for being here. I want to thank you
for your willingness to serve. Again, I am glad the executive
branch has nominated someone that has the kind of experience
that you have.
And when Senator Cardin arrives he may want to make some
opening comments, but I think short of that it would probably
be best--unless one of the other committee members would like
to address--if you would go ahead and give your testimony. We
would appreciate it.
STATEMENT OF GAYLE SMITH, NOMINATED TO BE ADMINISTRATOR OF THE
U.S. AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your
comments on those important issues.
Chairman Corker, Senators Menendez and Coons, I am honored
to appear before you today as the nominee for Administrator of
the United States Agency for International Development. It is
truly a privilege for me to come before this committee, and I
am grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry for their
trust and confidence.
I would also like to thank my family: my mother who is
watching from Columbus, OH; my brother Jay and sister-in-law
Marianne; Ben and Sarah; and my father and sister, who though
they may not be with us, will always be part of a family that
has continued to provide me with support and encouragement.
Since being nominated, I have had the opportunity to
consult with several members of this committee, and I have
appreciated your guidance and counsel to ensure that USAID
remains the world's top development agency.
In this time of great need and opportunity, USAID is
working with a diverse array of partners to end extreme
poverty, foster sustained and inclusive growth, and promote
resilient democratic societies both as an expression of our
values and to transform them into peaceful, open, and
flourishing partners of the United States. These are principles
that have driven my own approach to international development
across a 35-year career and principles that I will continue to
uphold as Administrator.
If confirmed, it would be an honor and privilege to support
the USAID mission alongside the more than 9,000 selfless men
and women who serve the American people in some of the world's
most challenging environments.
Should I have the honor of being confirmed, I will pursue
four priorities.
First, I will focus the Agency on programs that are
achieving results and will be selective about initiating new
commitments. I will work with Congress to institutionalize
successful programs, including Feed the Future, Power Africa,
and our efforts in maternal and child health.
Second, I will provide the leadership, guidance, and tools
needed to enable USAID staff in Washington and in the field to
deliver against our most urgent priorities. This includes
expanding the Agency's work on democracy, rights, and
governance. This also means expanding the Agency's impact on
human trafficking and on corruption, laying the groundwork for
the success of a critically important strategy for Central
America, and ensuring an equally important transition in
Afghanistan.
Third, if confirmed, I will act quickly to ensure that the
Agency maintains global leadership and agility in responding to
increasingly complex humanitarian crises. When a natural
disaster strikes or a humanitarian catastrophe is imminent,
USAID should be among the first on the ground to help those in
need. I will also work with this committee and other
stakeholders to pursue meaningful food aid reform that will
enable us, as you, sir, suggest, to reach more people more
quickly and while maintaining our historic partnership with
U.S. farmers and maritime.
Fourth and perhaps most important, I will focus on further
strengthening the institution. This will involve expanding the
capacity of the Agency to mobilize resources and engagement
from other partners; to draw on science, technology, and
innovation to address development challenges; and to increase
investment in effective local solutions.
Strengthening USAID also means tackling some of the
management and operational challenges facing an agency that
manages resources across more than 80 countries, often in
complex environments. The Agency must ensure that American
taxpayer dollars are spent responsibly. It must identify
successful programs, learn from prior mistakes, apply lessons
learned, and share best practices, all in an open and
transparent way. If progress is not being made, it must take
corrective action or terminate projects.
But strengthening USAID also means supporting and listening
to its people both here and overseas. These are men and women
with knowledge, institutional memory, and invaluable insight.
Indeed, they take on some of the most daunting tasks and
aspirational missions one can imagine, all on behalf of our
Government and our country. It is my goal to give them the
visibility, respect, and gratitude that they deserve.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I thank you for
considering my nomination, and I look forward to your
questions. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Smith follows:]
Prepared Statement of Gayle E. Smith
Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
committee, I am honored to appear before you today as the nominee for
Administrator of the United States Agency for International
Development. It is a privilege to come before this committee, and I am
grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry for their trust and
confidence.
I would also like to thank my family--my mother, who is watching
from Columbus, Ohio, my brother Jay and sister-in-law Marianne, Ben and
Sarah, and my father and sister, who though they may not be with us,
will always be part of a family that has supported and encouraged me--a
family from which I draw strength and humor each and every day.
Since being nominated, I have had the opportunity to consult with
several members of this committee, and I have appreciated your guidance
and counsel to ensure that USAID remains the world's preeminent
development agency. From the humanitarian emergency in Syria and
ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine, to the pressing needs in Central
America and the Ebola virus in West Africa, today's world demands
creative solutions to increasingly complex problems.
Over the past two administrations, we have seen unprecedented
bipartisan support for the Agency's key initiatives, from global health
and food security to humanitarian assistance and science and
technology--as well as a recognition that the Agency's work must be
informed by a rigorous use of evidence and data to guide
decisionmaking. These are principles that have driven my own approach
to international development across a 35 year career, and principles
that I will continue to uphold as Administrator, if confirmed.
In this time of great need and opportunity, USAID is working with a
diverse array of partners to end extreme poverty, foster sustained and
inclusive growth, and promote resilient democratic societies, both as
an expression of our values and to help build them into peaceful, open,
and flourishing partners of the United States.
If confirmed, it would be an honor and privilege to support the
USAID mission alongside the selfless men and women who serve the
American people in some of the world's most challenging environments.
With more than 9,000 men and women and a strong field presence in
over 80 countries, USAID is uniquely positioned to flexibly respond to
humanitarian crises with agility and to provide enduring leadership to
solve the world's most intractable development challenges--all for less
than 1 percent of the federal budget.
Over the past 5 years, USAID has embraced a new model of
development shaped by data and evidence that brings together an
increasingly diverse community--private sector companies,
entrepreneurs, local civil society organizations, universities, NGOs,
and communities of faith--to deliver meaningful results.
By using assistance to support capacity-building and reform
critical policies, the Agency has led a government-wide effort to
mobilize domestic and foreign private sector investments, including
more than $10 billion of private commitments through Feed the Future
and more than $20 billion through Power Africa. USAID has worked with
entrepreneurs through its Global Development Lab to develop new
technologies that address longstanding development challenges. It has
partnered with a vibrant implementing partner community here in the
United States that has made its own pledges to support reconstruction
in Haiti, economic development in Africa, and global food security. And
it has elevated the importance of local solutions, investing in the
role and wisdom of partners on ground.
Against this backdrop, USAID has responded to an unprecedented
number of humanitarian crises spawned by earthquakes and typhoons,
droughts and famines, the Ebola epidemic, and chronic and new
conflicts. In the past year, the Agency has simultaneously operated an
unprecedented five Disaster Assistance Response Teams, bringing new
knowledge and creativity to bear, whether by building resilience even
while providing emergency relief or adapting data and technology to
enable a faster and more efficient response.
USAID has taken great strides to improve operations, increase
transparency, embrace accountability and ensure that the Agency is both
responsive and responsible. There is much more to be done, but as
someone who has worked with and observed this Agency and our foreign
assistance programs for decades, I can sincerely offer that it is well
on a path of reform and revitalization that is yielding and can yield
greater and more potent returns for the United States and millions of
men, women, and children around the world.
I believe that we share the view that both development and
responding to humanitarian crises are in our national interests and
that these pursuits reflect our values. I also believe that we share
the view that we need a strong, capable, effective, and responsible
USAID to pursue these interests and values. It would be an honor to
serve as the USAID Administrator, and to turn my qualifications and
experience to the task of leading the Agency.
Over a 35-year career in development and international affairs, I
have spent two decades in the field, much of that time well outside
capital cities. As a journalist for the BBC, American and European
outlets, I spent months at a time in active war zones, covering
conflicts that had escaped the world's attention.
I have consulted for the World Bank, UNICEF and major American
foundations. I have worked with several NGOs, including members of the
World Council of Churches when they mounted a cross-border emergency
relief operation during the Ethiopian famine. I cofounded two NGOs, and
today, the Modernizing Foreign Assistance Network and the ENOUGH
Project remain active and effective advocates for a robust U.S. policy
in support of development and human rights.
I have served on a congressional commission--the Helping to Enhance
the Livelihood of People around the Globe (HELP) Commission--which was
established to review U.S. foreign aid, and I worked for USAID, based
in East Africa. I have served two Presidents, as Senior Director for
African Affairs on President Clinton's National Security Council staff
and as Senior Director for Development, Democracy, and Humanitarian
Affairs under President Obama. I have traveled and worked with former
President Carter and provided advice and assistance to President George
H.W. Bush's National Security Council staff.
Over the last 6 years, as a member of the Obama administration, I
have coordinated administration policy on global development and
foreign assistance programs, democracy, governance and anticorruption
efforts, and humanitarian crisis response.
Early in my tenure, I spearheaded efforts to develop the
Presidential Study of Global Development Policy and the first-ever
Presidential Policy Directive on Global Development, which elevated
development alongside defense and diplomacy as pillars of American
foreign policy.
Responding to humanitarian crises has been a significant focus of
my time at the National Security Council, including the Nepal
earthquake, major typhoons in Asia, the Ebola outbreak in West Africa,
and ongoing conflicts in Syria and Iraq.
Working with departments and agencies, including USAID, I have
assumed the primary role at the National Security Council for all major
development priorities, including Feed the Future, Power Africa, ending
the HIV/AIDS epidemic, maternal and child health, the Open Government
Partnership, and the Partnership on Illicit Finance. I have co-led,
with colleagues, the development of the Global Health Security Agenda,
the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, and the President's Stand with Civil
Society Initiative.
Should I have the honor of being confirmed, I will pursue four
priorities.
First, I will focus the Agency on programs that are achieving
results and will be selective about initiating new commitments.
Further, I will work with Congress to institutionalize these programs.
I will also work with this committee and other stakeholders to pursue
meaningful food aid reform that will enable us to reach more people,
more quickly, in times of need--all while maintaining our historic
partnership with U.S. farmers and maritime.
Feed the Future and the New Alliance for Food Security and
Nutrition have together elevated food security on the global agenda,
registered direct impact on reducing poverty and improving nutrition,
and mobilized billions of dollars in direct assistance and private
resources. In 2013 alone, Feed the Future reached more than 12.5
million children with nutrition interventions and helped more than 7
million farmers and food producers use new technologies and management
practices on more than 4 million hectares of land. If confirmed, I will
ensure that Feed the Future and related nutrition programs continue to
deliver these evidence-based results.
With a long-term goal of doubling access to cleaner, reliable, and
efficient electricity in sub-Saharan Africa, Power Africa has already
brought more than 4,100 megawatts worth of power transactions to
financial close and raised over $20 billion from more than 90 private
sector partners. At the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit, President Obama
tripled our initial goal to 30,000 megawatts, aiming to bring
electricity to 60 million homes and businesses in Africa. If confirmed,
I will support Power Africa as it closes more power transactions,
partners with additional businesses, and expands into new countries.
If confirmed, I will continue the Agency's leadership in the global
effort to end preventable child and maternal deaths. USAID has led an
international coalition that developed targeted action plans in 24
priority countries that will save the lives of 15 million children and
600,000 women by 2020. I will also work closely with the Office of the
Global AIDS Coordinator, the Centers for Disease Control, the National
Institutes of Health, and international and local partners to ensure
that USAID does all it can to contribute to a goal that is within
reach: ending the HIV/AIDS epidemic.
Second, I will provide the leadership, guidance, and tools needed
to enable USAID's staff in Washington and the field to deliver against
our most urgent priorities. This includes expanding the Agency's work
and impact on democracy, rights, and governance by securing and
mobilizing additional resources to strengthen institutions and the rule
of law, support and build the capacity of civil society organizations,
enable free and fair elections, foster dialogue and promote
transparency, and build on the successes of, for example, the recent
elections in Nigeria. This also means, as I have discussed with several
of you during our consultations, expanding the Agency's impact on human
trafficking and corruption, laying the groundwork for the success of a
critically important strategy for Central America, and ensuring an
equally important transition in Afghanistan.
Third, if confirmed, I will act quickly to ensure that the Agency
maintains global leadership and agility in responding to increasingly
complex humanitarian crises around the world. In 2014 alone, USAID
responded to 49 disasters in 42 countries. In addition to the Ebola
outbreak in West Africa, these included major crises in Syria, Iraq,
South Sudan, Central African Republic, and, most recently, the
earthquake in Nepal.
The Agency has developed an effective relationship with the
Department of Defense, which has on multiple occasions deployed in
support of USAID. USAID also continues to build the capacity and
resiliency of governments to respond to disasters themselves. When a
natural disaster strikes or a humanitarian catastrophe is imminent, the
Agency is and should be among the first on the ground to help those in
need, and in a world rife with crises, I believe it is critical to
ensure that USAID remains one step ahead.
Fourth, and perhaps most important, I will focus on further
strengthening the institution. That means building on the reform agenda
launched by Administrator Rajiv Shah. This will involve expanding the
capacity of the Agency to mobilize resources and engagement from other
partners; to draw on science, technology, and innovation to address
development challenges; and to increase investment in effective local
solutions.
Strengthening the institution involves tackling some of the
management and operational challenges facing an agency that manages
resources across over 80 countries, often in complex environments. It
is my view, and one that is shared by the staff of USAID, that the
Agency must ensure that American taxpayer dollars are spent
responsibly. It must identify successful programs, learn from prior
mistakes, apply lessons learned, and share best practices--all in an
open and transparent way. If progress is not being made, it must take
corrective action or terminate projects.
USAID has already implemented critical reforms to safeguard
taxpayer dollars, ensure greater accountability and oversight, and
focus on sustainable results. In 2013, the Agency issued new guidance
for awarding contracts that increased the weight of past performance in
identifying potential contractors. Its new compliance unit has already
executed over 200 suspension and debarment actions since its inception
in 2011. If confirmed, I will build on these and other components of
the reform agenda that strive to make the Agency more accountable to
Congress and the American people. I will always be fully transparent
about what is working and what is not, and I will ask for your help in
solving problems and seeking opportunities.
Strengthening USAID also means supporting and listening to its
people, both here in Washington and overseas. These are men and women
with knowledge, institutional memory, and invaluable insight. Indeed,
they take on some of the most daunting tasks and aspirational missions
one can imagine, all on behalf of our government and our country. It is
my goal to give them the visibility, respect, and gratitude that they
deserve.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the committee,
should I have the honor of serving as Administrator, you have my word
that I will be ambitious but focused; that I will not downplay
challenges but seek your help; that I will strengthen a growing
bipartisan consensus on development that serves us and the world so
well; and that I will pass on to my successor an Agency that is strong
and effective, responsive and responsible, and transparent and
accountable--an Agency worthy of its dedicated men and women and those
around the world that they aim to serve.
The Chairman. We thank you for being here.
And our distinguished ranking member--I do not know if you
want to make some opening comments. Okay.
As we have mentioned and you have mentioned, we have been
working on some human trafficking issues and certainly hope to
do something to majorly affect modern day slavery. What
approaches has USAID identified and tested that demonstrably
contribute to reducing modern day slavery?
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator, for the question and also
for your leadership on this issue.
I think USAID to date has done a lot to contribute to this
in the areas of training on rule of law, information and
education through the media, through NGOs, through new
applications, and new technologies, through also responding to
the victims of human trafficking.
As you and I have discussed, I think that there is a
foundation to build on and that we could actually do much more.
If confirmed, I hope that we can expand on the work the agency
has done to integrate the fight against human trafficking into
its programs around the world to take full advantage of its
presence in over 80 countries, to work on, importantly, the
supply chains that USAID focuses on frequently as it is working
on economic development and which, as you know, are among the
places that human traffickers hide and exploit the most
vulnerable.
So if confirmed, this is something that I will make a
priority. I believe the men and women of the Agency believe it
is a priority, and I very much look forward to working with you
and others on the committee to explore what more we can do on
this important agenda.
The Chairman. We, as you know, have been working on the
Food for Peace program that I alluded to earlier. There is
always a tug between working on this and making sure that the
United States agriculture community is on board because,
obviously, it matters relative to putting these reforms in
place.
There are a lot of people out there that are trying to
allude to the fact if we create more flexibility, that much of
what we will be buying we will be buying from Russia and/or
China, which is not true. But I wonder if you could expand on
that non-fact?
Ms. Smith. Senator, I think on this issue the facts show us
a few things. One, Food for Peace has been an enormously
valuable program for many, many decades. And I think we want to
preserve----
[Audience disruption.]
The Chairman. One of your supporters, I guess.
Ms. Smith. Yes. [Laughter.]
Anyway, if I may continue, Senator. Food for Peace has been
a vital program. I have spent a lot of time in the field and
have seen cases where food aid made an important difference,
but also cases where the greater flexibility to which you
allude would be enormously valuable in reaching more people
more quickly. It is my belief that in consultation with key
partners, constituents, and supporters of that program over
time--it is my hope that we can find a way forward that would
give USAID and particularly our people in the field that
flexibility and ensure that at the same time we reflect and
take into full account the very legitimate and important
interests of our communities here. I am optimistic that we can
find a way forward. I am very encouraged by the number of
Senators, yourself included, who have raised this during the
consultations prior to this hearing. And so it is my intent, if
confirmed, to work very closely with all of you to see if we
can get this done.
The Chairman. Your predecessor had worked on, in essence, a
$95 million transfer from food aid to the maritime industry in
order to give ourselves the flexibility to feed more people.
And as bad as that sounds--I actually wish every American could
be aware of that--but as bad as that sounds, if there is a way
to phase that out over a period of time so that it got to zero,
there may be a way of dealing with this. I just wonder if you
might give some editorial comments regarding that?
Ms. Smith. Senator, I am a little bit hesitant to get too
specific on the particulars. But I do think in principle--and I
followed very closely Administrator Shah's work on this--that
we can find ways to transition toward a program that is
mutually beneficial to all involved. And I think considerable
time has been given to thinking through how to do that within
the Agency, even after Administrator Shah's departure, and I
know among members of this committee. So I would be happy to
sit down with you and with others to work through what exact
calibration might be most appropriate and to consult, again,
with all stakeholders so we can find a way to do this.
The Chairman. On Power Africa--the administration has spent
a great deal of time talking about renewables being sort of the
base delivery system in Africa. Not unlike our own country,
there are places where renewables work decently well and there
are places where they just do not. Does the administration
support the development of fossil fuel energy as an integral
and indispensable part of Power Africa acknowledging that, at
its base, it is more important that we ensure that people have
access to electricity than promoting goals that just do not
agree with the particular area that we are in, and actually are
not feasible?
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator, again for your interest in
Power Africa.
Let me say a couple of things about how we have structured
this initiative and address your particular question.
Power Africa, in identifying priority transactions, looks
at a number of things. It looks at private sector demand, the
potential for transformational projects, buy-in from the
government, opportunities to exploit the vast resources on the
continent, project viability, and overall impact.
Now, within that, it is our belief that like any modern
power sector, we need to rely on a broad array of generation
sources, including wind, solar, hydropower, geothermal, and
natural gas.
On the particular issue you raised, except in the poorest
countries or where those plants are equipped with carbon
capture and storage technology, the United States does not
provide public financing for new coal-fired power plants
pursuant to President Obama's Climate Action Plan of June 2013.
Now, I want to be very clear that this is with the
exception of the poorest countries, many of which are on the
African Continent.
The Chairman. So you are saying in those areas that are
very poor, that we are trying deal with the people in most
need, that the Obama administration would support coal
facilities to produce power?
Ms. Smith. I think if these met the other criteria that we
have designated as key for identifying projects, according to
the terms of the Climate Action Plan in those poorest
countries, it would be worthy of consideration.
The Chairman. If you do not mind, what are some of those
other criteria?
Ms. Smith. As I said at the start, we try to look at need,
where we are going to have transactions that will have impact,
where we have investor interest, buy-in from the government,
where our experts take a look and think that the project is
likely viable and it can make a meaningful contribution to the
ultimate goal of Power Africa to double access to electricity.
So those would be the individual project criteria.
The Chairman. So almost any of the countries we are dealing
with would meet that criteria?
Ms. Smith. Most countries in Africa would meet that
criteria. I think there are a few where it is a little bit
difficult, given the current conditions.
The Chairman. And again, natural gas. There are all kinds
of other ways of dealing with it. I am not here to push one
particular area. But obviously, when you are living in a place
with zero electricity, getting that is important, and maybe
some of these other criteria need to move away. So I think you
have said that you agree with that--that the Obama
administration agrees.
Ms. Smith. I think it is critically important. And I think
the other thing that Power Africa has done very well is an
initiative called Beyond the Grid, which also looks at people
in some of the poorest areas of Africa and the most remote and
where new technologies and innovations can be deployed through
micro-grid, or off-grid solutions. So that is another option
for reaching some of the most vulnerable.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Ms. Smith. Thank you.
Senator Cardin. Well, Mr. Chairman, first thank you for
scheduling this hearing. I think it is very important that we
move forward in the nomination process and have a confirmed
Administrator for USAID. This is a critically important
position, and I thank you for your cooperation in scheduling
this hearing.
I want to thank Mrs. Smith for her willingness to continue
to serve and her willingness to step forward with this very
important position. And I want to thank your family because we
know this is a joint sacrifice, and we thank you very much for
that.
We have been debating for 3 weeks on the floor of the
Senate our national security budget for the Department of
Defense. The role that we play in development assistance is
equally important part of our national security budget. So we
consider the responsibility of this position to be one of the
highest in our national security interests. So we thank you
again for stepping forward.
Yesterday under Chairman Gardner, we had a hearing in the
East Asia and The Pacific Subcommittee dealing with trade in
the region, and USAID was present to talk about capacity-
building for trade. If we are going to have successful
opportunities there, countries need to have the capacity to
deal with modern trade agreements, and USAID plays a very
important role there. And I could keep on going on about
additional areas in which the responsibilities of the agency
that you are being considered to lead plays.
Under Administrator Shah, there were new initiatives that
many of us supported, including the Global Development Lab
which allowed us to do more with the recognition that our
resources are limited, by leveraging the help of private
companies, universities, and NGOs. All of that is important.
And I know that you understand how critically important it is
to prioritize. And you and I had conversations about that, and
you mentioned that in your preliminary statement.
I want to talk a little bit about human rights. You are not
going to be surprised to learn that, because I think USAID can
play a critically important role in advancing human rights, I
want to talk about three priorities within that.
First, what efforts do you believe we can make to fight
corruption? What will be our anticorruption strategies? When we
look at stability globally, we find the countries that have not
been able to deal with corruption are going to have a problem.
Many believe that the Ukraine revolution was not so much about
Russia's influence but more about people who wanted an honest
government. We could go on--the Arab Spring was also a
condemnation of governments that were corrupt and denied their
people basic human rights.
The second issue I want you to talk about is the role of
women. We have also found that the way a country treats its
women is a good indicator of a nation's strength. And I am
interested in your commitment and ideas and vision as to how
USAID can be more effective in advancing the rights of girls
and women globally as we look for greater stability and more
reliable strategic partners.
And the third issue--and I put all three on the table--is
that World Refugee Day is coming up. We are approaching 60
million refugees today, one of the highest numbers of refugees
in modern history. When you look at the number of displaced
people around the world, we have a crisis, and USAID needs to
be actively engaged in what we are doing to deal with this
humanitarian crisis.
So I would like to hear your vision in regards to how we
will advance anticorruption measures as part of any program
within USAID, how you plan to make advancing the rights of
women and girls the highest priority within your agency, and
what are we doing to carry out our responsibility in regards to
the world refugee issue.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator. And I was thrilled when you
raised in our meeting and as you raise right now the issue of
corruption. I could not agree with you more, that it is perhaps
the greatest enemy to development.
The flip side of that, of course, is if we can tackle
corruption in meaningful ways, it frees up significant
resources for development. This is something that is a priority
for the Agency. It is something I would like us to build on
through some terrific things the Agency has done over the
years.
The first is, obviously, transparency. Now, that means
transparency for USAID but also encouraging and calling for
greater transparency from its partners. As you know, it makes a
huge difference when citizens can see where resources go. So I
think that is the first thing.
I think the second area--and this is where I think we are
seeing some significant--insufficient but significant--momentum
around the world is on greater adherence to norms and
standards. We have been able, through multilateral
organizations and other means, to work with countries to sign
up to the international laws, rules, obligations, and treaties
that require norms and standards on corruption.
The third--and I mentioned this to you in our meeting--is
something called the Open Government Partnership, which the
United States was a founder of with several other countries and
has now grown to over 65 country members. What is quite
interesting in that initiative is that it requires governments
to join in publishing their budgets. Publishing the budget
makes a huge difference and breaks the ice, if you will. I
think we can build on that. Some countries have used it more
effectively than others. A critical piece is that it entails a
partnership between governments and civil society where civil
society holds the government accountable for meeting the terms
of its open government plan.
We are also working on--and this is something we would like
to build on--a partnership to deal with illicit finance. There
are huge losses in capital to the developing world to illicit
finance. So that is also a priority on the corruption side.
Let me turn to your two other issues, if I may.
I think USAID has made the rights and well-being of women
and girls a priority for many, many years, and that is a
priority I would very much like to build on, whether it be in
global health where it is a primary focus, in Feed the Future
where there has been a particular focus on women farmers, but
also in the areas of rights, access, and critically important,
in training. I have traveled around the world and seen a lot of
USAID missions. I have seen a lot of leaders in civil society
and government. I have been very proud to see that some of
those people were trained by USAID. So I think the training
mission is critical, and support raising this issue at every
opportunity.
Finally, USAID is also participating in the First Lady's
initiative called Let Girls Learn, which is about enabling more
young women to pursue their secondary education.
World Refugee Day is daunting. The numbers are staggering.
USAID works closely with partners in the State Department's
Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration on this issue. It
is my very strong view that we have to give a lot more
attention to this so there is a better understanding of the
consequences of conflict and violations of human rights. So,
again, this is something that I think is in the Agency's
humanitarian mission--while my hope is to strengthen the
Agency's ability to stay a step ahead and respond, it is also
to give much greater visibility to these issues.
Senator Cardin. Let me just point out--and I appreciate not
only your response but the conversations that we have had on
these subjects. You give me great confidence that these all
will be highest priorities in your agency.
We need to be very strict about how we use our aid programs
in countries that have challenges in dealing with corruption.
We have got to make sure that the United States aid program is
not contributing to a corrupt government or corrupt officials.
And it is critically important that the Administrator send a
very clear message and have clear directions on how not to
participate in or fund corruption within governments.
Ms. Smith. I could not agree with you more, Senator, and if
confirmed, you will have that.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Gardner.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you for being here today. It is great to have a
University of Colorado graduate testifying before the panel. So
welcome.
And I just wanted to follow up some of the conversations we
had in my office.
Yesterday we did have a hearing--Senator Cardin and I--with
Jason Foley, the Deputy Assistant Administrator for Asia for
the Agency. It was a good conversation.
One of the things we talked about is just where priorities
are for the Asia-Pacific region. If you could just spend a
little bit of time talking about that, I would appreciate it.
Ms. Smith. And I think the greater emphasis on Asia has
been reflected in an increase in resources and personnel. As we
discussed the other day, I think there are some other things
that we can explore in Asia. And I am interested in the
reference to trade capacity-building. That is one of them. I
think that is something USAID makes huge contributions to
around the world whether it is at the level of petty trade,
local trade, national, regional, or in fact global trade.
What I would like to do, if confirmed--and Senator, I would
love to work with you and others on this--is do more of in Asia
and elsewhere of what USAID has done very well in other parts
of the world, and that is to help work on the constraints to
private capital flows and increase private capital flows in
support of development in Asia. That is number one.
Number two, work with governments again to build on what
USAID has done to date to build the capacity to run and sustain
economies that are inclusive and deliver for their citizens. I
think that there is a lot that we can build out on, some of it
aided by resources, which are critically important, as you have
pointed out; some of it by taking the lessons the agency has
learned in other initiatives in other parts of the world and
applying them more effectively there.
So these are all things I think we can do. I am quite
interested--as I say, I have less experience in Asia than other
parts of the world--in consulting with you and with others and
obviously our men and women in the Agency here in Washington,
particularly those in the field, to see what more can be done.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Last year, the GAO, the Government Accountability Office,
produced an assessment of USAID's trade capacity-building
efforts and concluded--and I will quote the report. The U.S.
Agency for International Development's 2003 trade capacity-
building strategy does not directly guide TCB activities and
parts of the strategy no longer reflect the current TCB
environment.
If confirmed, do you plan to update the TCB strategy?
Ms. Smith. Yes. I think that is something we can do,
Senator--I have worked with USAID on this in my current
capacity, and I think USAID has learned a great deal. One of
the things USAID has also done a phenomenal job of over the
last few years is, again, taking those lessons and then
figuring out how to apply them. So I think that could be a
very, very good exercise.
Senator Gardner. Thank you. And I would love to follow up
with you on some of the ideas for doing just that.
Ms. Smith. Great. Thank you.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
The Chairman. Senator, I noticed her staff was somewhat
alarmed that she would answer a question off the cuff like
that. So thank you for doing that. [Laughter.]
There was quite a shock in the back. [Laughter.]
Senator Menendez.
Senator Gardner. That is the training of a University of
Colorado graduate right there. [Laughter.]
Senator Menendez. Well, welcome. All my questions are off
the cuff. No.
First of all, as someone who has been and is a huge
supporter of USAID, this is an incredibly important nomination.
I congratulate you on being nominated. And I appreciate having
listened to you here at the hearing describe your priorities in
the same way that you did in the private meeting that we had.
And there are a lot of issues I have, some which I will
submit for the record. But the one that I want to pursue with
you is the question of democracy and governance, and following
on to Senator Cardin's questions of human rights.
I am concerned that democracy and governance at USAID under
the President's tenure has been cut by 38 percent, and I think
there are a lot of critical countries in the Middle East, North
Africa, Latin America, and Africa as a whole that have great
needs that are woefully underfunded. And part of our challenge
is, yes, economic growth and giving people greater
opportunities, but in part that comes from more transparent
democratic governance at the end of the day in countries, which
is a longer term proposition, but nonetheless incredibly
important to stop, because when in the Middle East you are
facing a future that is so dismal that you can have your mind
converted to believe that dying is more glorifying than living,
that is a real challenge. It is a challenge to our national
security and interests. It is a challenge in the region. And
unless we change the dynamics of what is happening in those
countries over time, we will continuously be in a perpetual
war. And so I think it is important to be thinking about that
in the long term, but it has got to start in a more significant
way. When you cut democracy and governance by 38 percent, it
does not lead us in the right direction.
So, one, I would like to get your sense of how you will try
to stem the tide here. Two, I would like to get a sense from
you that--and you and I talked about this a little bit, about
those who would say that stability is more important than
democracy and governance, that we are willing to look the other
way on democracy and governance in order to have stability.
And three, do you believe that if a country resists or
attempts to thwart our democracy initiatives that we should
simply end those programs in that country, as we are seeing
such challenges, for example, in Pakistan, where several
members of this committee and others of the Senate have written
about NGOs, the NDI, The Republican Institute, and Save the
Children, and others having challenges in Pakistan? Give me a
sense on those issues.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator, and thank you both for the
conversation we had the other day and your leadership on these
issues.
I agree with you on the importance of resources, and I
believe you are aware that the President's request includes an
increase in resources for democracy and governance.
But I think there are several other things we need to do.
One is press others to also increase their resources. I
think worldwide, if you look at investments in democracy,
governance, and human rights, they are far below where they
should be, and I think we are in agreement that this is
essentially the backbone that is needed to ensure that the
gains of development are sustained.
I would also like to look at the potential impact of having
additional personnel on the ground, particularly democracy and
governance officers, who often, with technical assistance--but
not necessarily large quantities of assistance--can play a
hugely important role in training and using their convening
power and other tools to build capacity. I think USAID's record
on training at the institutional level for civil society and
NGOs is something we can build out. I know the Agency is
looking at how to make greater use of regional platforms where
more people and more organizations can be trained at once and
where also, and importantly, networks can be built.
I also believe, sir, that a government that is credible in
the eyes of its citizens is a government that delivers
transparently and in ways that are meaningful and impact the
lives of those citizens. So in the areas where USAID has a very
big presence and budget in health and in food security, the
Agency has worked on--and I think we can expand--also looking
at governance in those sectors. Is it transparent? Are the
budgets transparent? Are citizens able to avail themselves of
the equivalent of a feedback loop to ensure that, again, those
services are delivered but in a way that is effective and
transparent?
As I mentioned in response to Senator Cardin the Open
Government Partnership, I have been quite impressed by what
that has provided in terms of triggering a worldwide debate on
what open governance means and what the obligations of
governments are, while also exercising the muscles of some
governments in transition, with their civil societies to see
what it is actually like to both cooperate and have civil
society hold governments accountable.
I believe as well that USAID is in a very good position,
along with the State Department, to play the role of broker or
facilitator in dialogue between governments and civil society.
I appreciate that you also made, sir, the point about this
being a long-term proposition. I think the importance of our
investing as a nation through USAID and by any other means in
institution-building is ultimately the key because it is when
we have got strong, effective, and transparent institutions
that I think we have the greatest assurance.
Senator Menendez. Let me make one observation before my
time runs out, as well as one final question.
Ms. Smith. Yes.
Senator Menendez. And your answer, which I appreciate, a
lot of it was focused on governance, and I agree that is an
important issue. But I also think we have to decide whether
USAID is going to play a role in democracy-building or not. And
if it is, then it needs to be robust, and if it is not, then we
need to think about how we move those resources to an entity
that would, which brings me to my final question.
I am pleased to see that the administration has its
traditional request for Cuba democracy programs at $20 million.
And I have clearly a very different view of United States-Cuba
policy than the administration. But the one thing, I would
think, that we can all come together on are programs that
ultimately we pursue worldwide in other countries that are
undemocratic, and that we do not allow the entities in those
countries, whether they are autocratic dictatorships or other
authoritarian regimes, to just stop our programs at the end of
the day because they do not like it, otherwise we would have
given up a long time ago and would not have been successful in
Eastern Europe at the time of Vaclav Havel, Lech Walesa, and so
many others.
So the question is, as it relates to Cuba democracy
programs, can you make a commitment that you will prioritize
programs that strengthen independent civil society, defend
human rights, and expand democratic space and increased access
to information inside of Cuba?
Ms. Smith. Senator, yes. Let me address a couple of things
you have said.
First, I believe that the U.S. Agency for International
Development is and must be an agency that is about supporting
democratic institutions, expanding democracy and democratic
practices. So I think that is and must remain a priority.
With respect to Cuba, my understanding is USAID is
continuing programs in democracy, governance, human rights, and
the free flow of information, and intends to do so. And that is
certainly my intention if confirmed.
I also believe you make a very important point with respect
to the situations where we find that governments reject, close
space, or take other measures that constrain the evolution of
democracy. I think we need to respond in those cases. I think
we may respond differently in different cases and must do what
is effective. In some cases, we may not be supporting an actual
government. We may be working primarily with local civil
society or other groups. But I do think it is something we must
respond to, and I will, if confirmed.
Thank you.
Senator Menendez. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Coons.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Chairman Corker.
And welcome, Ms. Smith.
Ms. Smith. Thank you.
Senator Coons. I very much look forward to your
confirmation and to continuing to work with you in what I hope
will be your new role in leadership of USAID.
And I appreciate and just want to join with the chairman in
questioning about food aid reform and then talk a little bit
more about effectiveness, monitoring, and economic development,
if I could.
What role do you see for local and regional procurement and
for readjusting some of the commodity and cargo preferences in
the path forward toward a reasonable and balanced reform to our
food aid program?
Ms. Smith. Senator, again, as you know, the President in
his budget made a proposal for food aid reform. So I certainly
believe that this is something we need to pursue.
I believe there are ways to do it. I think there is
probably some sort of equation that will be the ultimate
solution. I am a little bit hesitant to get exactly into the
particulars because in my current role I have not been directly
consulting with all the parties.
But I do think we can and should find a balance that does a
number of things: enables the Agency to respond more quickly
and meet the needs of more people while maintaining those very
important, vital parts of a program that have served us well
over many years and also meet the needs and concerns of a broad
range of constituencies. I think it is entirely possible. It is
something I would make a priority, if confirmed.
Senator Coons. Great. Well, I look forward to working with
you, the chairman, and other members on achieving that right
balance between a lot a different interests and concerns.
There is a number of initiatives that you may well get to
carry forward that are, in no small part, focused on economic
development in a part of the world we have both spent a fair
amount of time in, whether Power Africa, Trade Africa, Feed the
Future, Global Health Initiative. I have a concern about Power
Africa that it has largely been funded out of democracy and
governance programming funds, and my hope is that we will get
an authorization and then dedicated sources of funding for the
long term. But speak to those initiatives, if you would, in
terms of which you think has been most successful in the last 5
years and which you would prioritize your focus on, if
confirmed as Administrator, to try and advance both economic
development and human development.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for your
engagement on Africa, but also your engagement on development.
I believe Feed the Future is one of the most successful
initiatives we have seen in a long time. And I would point out
that it was originally built as an initiative that started in
Africa and has now expanded. There are Feed the Future
countries outside of Africa that follow the same model, which
include countries having a comprehensive plan and their own
investing in that plan. I think this is something we can build
on. I think it is something that has influenced the rest of the
world. I think we have put food security and agricultural
development back on the world's map, both through Feed the
Future and support for that initiative. So I think anything we
can do to ensure that it not only achieves as much impact as
possible over the next 18 months but also well beyond that. I
sincerely hope that Feed the Future is an initiative that will
be continued, and I think it is worthy of it.
Power Africa--and I would be delighted, if confirmed, to
work with you on any resource issues--I think is something that
has shown us that the development model that USAID and the
other agencies and departments that are part of that
initiative, because there are 12 all together, have figured
out. I think there has been a search for the silver bullet on
energy or infrastructure. I do not believe there is one, but I
do think that we have come up with something that allows us to
identify viable projects, interested investors, and
importantly, break down the constraints and build the capacity
that is necessary to get a transaction done that not only
yields greater access to electricity but exercises the muscles
of trade and investment and also demonstrates success. Because,
as you know very well, in Africa, risk perception is a very
powerful thing, and I think over time we are reducing it.
I think it is also important that Power Africa is not
overwhelmingly assistance-driven. The team has USAID at the
lead, but again, all of those agencies and departments have
done a phenomenal job of leveraging private sector capital and
working with other countries. Sweden has put $1 billion behind
this. The World Bank is engaged with us. So, again, using our
leadership and a good idea to get others involved has been key.
I think Global Health, if I may, Senator, is and will
remain a top priority I certainly hope for this administration,
as it has for past administrations.
Senator Coons. Thank you. Across those few, if I might, I
am pleased to hear that you think Feed the Future is scalable--
--
Ms. Smith. I do.
Senator Coons [continuing]. And can expand just its early
success in Africa and is worth working together to sustain and
grow.
Second, I hope within Global Health that the development of
an HIV vaccine will continue to be an area of priority and
focus. Although it has a long trajectory, it would have an
enormous cumulative impact.
I also just wanted to recognize that the value of
partnering with other development entities from around the
world, with the private sector, as demonstrated in your
comments, I see real value in. The Millennium Challenge
Corporation I think in a number of countries where I have had
the opportunity to visit with its sites and when I have had the
chance to meet with their leadership has turned me from a
skeptic to a real advocate because I think that long-term model
of having metrics and accountability and measurable results and
of doing development in partnership with other governments in a
way that builds their capacity I think is really promising.
Let me, as a last question, just mention the Paul Simon
Water for the World Act. I joined a number of my colleagues,
Chairman Corker and Senator Durbin, Flake as a cosponsor. I
think access to clean water and sanitation is one of those sort
of foundational concerns like access to electricity. Just tell
me, if you would, how USAID will seek to improve access to
clean drinking water and sanitation in the developing world
under your tenure if you become the Administrator.
Ms. Smith. Senator, let me just echo your endorsement of
MCC. I have enjoyed working with MCC and look forward to
continuing to do so in a new capacity, if I am confirmed.
On the issue of water and sanitation, that is really one of
USAID's strengths, whether it is in the development field or if
you look at emergency responses around the world. The Agency is
terrific at moving quickly and also on a long-term
developmental footing.
My understanding is the Agency has been working on a much
broader strategy and identified priority countries where our
experts believe that USAID can have the greatest impact. It is
something I am very eager to dive into further, including in
support of the act. So I think it is something that I would
like to come back to you on. I cannot claim to have exhaustive
knowledge of it yet, but as I say, it is something the agency
does very well. And my understanding is that they have been
working very hard on plans to look at how it can be expanded
but also how they can prioritize, again, in key countries where
they can achieve the greatest impact.
Senator Coons. Well, if I could simply, while Senator
Perdue settles in, let me just say in closing that on my trip
to Liberia last December, I was really impressed with the DART
team and with how USAID was not just delivering disaster
relief, humanitarian relief, but helping coordinate across
international and private sector and volunteer organizations
and how the incident management system that really was, in
large part, deployed through the DART team made a lasting and
compounding difference in how a complex, broad humanitarian
crisis was being dealt with. And I just wanted to commend the
great work that USAID has done and I believe will continue to
do under your leadership in responding to complex humanitarian
crises.
Ms. Smith. Thank you for that, Senator.
Senator Coons. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Senator Perdue.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Smith, good to see you again.
Ms. Smith. Good to see you.
Senator Perdue. Well, thank you very much for your career
service. And I find this role of USAID Administrator, as we
talked, to be tremendously important. And I was very impressed
with our conversation. I appreciate your forthrightness and
candor in our brief time together. I look forward to
maintaining that open dialogue. I think there is nothing better
in trying to establish our foreign policy around the world than
what we do with our philanthropy, and I know you share that as
well. You said that in our meeting.
In our fiscal environment, obviously, we want to know that
every dollar is--we are getting the most productive use out of
that that we can. I know you share that as well.
Assuming you are confirmed, though, I would love to have
you talk about it--and I am sorry I missed earlier testimony,
but I would love for you to talk about your priorities in the
next 18 months, if confirmed, and talk about are there private
priority areas that you would see yourself focusing on in
particularly the first year.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator. Thanks again for our
meeting.
Yes. Let me briefly go through priorities.
The first is achieving maximum impact in the areas where I
think we can achieve the greatest scale. And we have talked a
bit about some of those, Power Africa, Feed the Future, and
Global Health.
The second is a set of urgent priorities, including
expanding the agency's work on democracy, human rights, and
governance, obviously a critical strategy in Central America,
and for transition in Afghanistan.
The third--and Senator Coons just referred to this. I
believe that USAID is the best in the world in responding to
crises anywhere. They are flexible. They are adaptive. They are
creative. I think we need to make sure that the teams are able
to keep one step ahead in a world where we are unfortunately
seeing too many crises.
The last, but I think in many ways the most important and
something you and I talked about, is the management operations
of the agency. We put huge expectations on the men and women
who serve this agency to operate and manage huge amounts of
money often in very complex environments. They do an excellent
job. I think they are committed to being fully responsible with
taxpayer dollars. I think you will find with me that I will be
totally and utterly frank with you about what goes well and
what does not, but as I said to you in our private meeting, I
will also come to you and ask for help when we need to fix
things that may not work so well.
So on the operations and management of the Agency, I think
USAID does a terrific job of doing assessments on the front
end, looking at risk mitigation, evaluation and monitoring, and
responding to oversight. I would like to work with the team--
and it is a very dedicated team--to get out in front and ahead
of some of these things to see if we can identify problems and
challenges earlier, but also again to be able to come to you
and other members of this committee with some options we may
develop, and ask for your help and partnership in seeing if we
can work together to make this agency as effective, as
responsive, as responsible and agile as it needs to be in the
world we live in.
Senator Perdue. I look forward to that.
Another thing I want to follow up on is to have you speak
to us a little bit about how do we get other partner nations
around the world to help us in this role. I know they do now,
but there are more needs than we can meet. And as one country,
we cannot meet them all. This is not a budget conversation. It
is really more of a conversation philosophically. From your
role as the leading, I guess, contributor in this effort around
the world, how would you use this position to help influence
other countries to step up their support of philanthropy the
way we are?
Ms. Smith. First of all, I am not shy about asking for
money.
But, Senator, I think there are a couple things. And one
great example of this has been the work on food security and
agriculture where agencies and departments, including USAID,
including the State Department--all of us rallied together to
look at what the world was investing in agriculture, looking at
what we could do, and then literally going country to country
and saying here is what we expect you to put on the table. And
we challenged other countries to triple their investments. We
were polite, we were evidence-based, and we were relentless.
Ultimately we mobilized $33 billion.
Now, I think we can do that as a matter of practice. I
think part of it is, again, challenging countries, looking at
the evidence of where the investments are lacking, figuring out
what is appropriate, and pushing politely until we get there. I
think our convening power helps us enormously as does our
success. Again, with Power Africa, the fact that Sweden
announced last summer $1 billion in support of this enterprise
is because it is a good idea and it is working. So I think the
power of our example works.
The last thing I would like to mention, Senator--and I
think this is a trend we should build on--is that in a number
of countries, we are seeing the important recognition by
governments that something called domestic resource
mobilization is key, that it is critical that they invest more
in health, in education, in agriculture, and rely more on their
own budgets. Now, some of that means that they need assistance
in things like how to manage an effective tax administration. I
think we need to capitalize on this trend, build on it where we
have got countries that are stepping up and being real leaders
on it, and then using that to challenge other countries to meet
us at least part way. So I think that is another way that we
can mobilize additional resources.
Senator Perdue. Thank you.
If confirmed as Administrator, what would you do to ensure
the priorities identified at the mission level are incorporated
into final budget submissions to Congress and that presidential
initiatives, while important, do not distort necessarily--I
know they are important and they need to be taken into
consideration, but they do not distort the type of assistance
that you as the Administrator determine to be of utmost
importance. I guess what I am looking for is the priorities in
making sure that we all agree on those priorities with regard
to meeting the needs that USAID is charged to do.
Ms. Smith. Thank you for that question. And, Senator, I
will not fool you. This is not easy. There are huge demands.
There are huge opportunities, and it always is ultimately a
question of tradeoffs and prioritization.
So I think the first thing is to look carefully at what the
Agency's priorities are, to lean in the direction of those
places we are getting the greatest impact and meeting the
greatest need. Again, that is not easy because it means letting
some things go. I am prepared to do that if that is what,
again, the people in the Agency and others agree with, but I
think that is something we have to look at.
The other is I think listening to the field. We send teams
out in the field to run USAID missions. They have got eyes and
ears on the ground. They have got a sense and the experience to
know what is working and what is not and where we can have real
impact. So I think factoring that in at the end of the day is
important.
And finally, I think we have got to continue to leverage
and draw in other resources because, as you said yourself--and
I strongly agree--we cannot do everything. I think something we
can do more of is mobilize, quite frankly, other people's
resources to match our own.
Senator Perdue. Well, thank you for your testimony.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome. I look forward to working with you in your new
position. You have done very well today. Thank you for taking
the time to meet with all of us.
I am glad to hear in response to a question from Senator
Perdue, you are not shy about asking for money because I wanted
to ask you a question about resources.
Interestingly, you skirted the issue a little bit in
response to a question from Senator Menendez. You said
resources are important, but let me tell you all the ways that
we can get around needing more resources. And it speaks to a
fear that I at least have about the aid community.
I mean, the Defense Department is never shy about coming up
to Capitol Hill and telling us when they do not have the
resources to meet their operational demands, and they tell us
routinely the risk at which we are putting the Nation if we do
not fund the Department of Defense's budget to the amount that
meets their defined objectives overseas.
I do not always feel the same way about the aid community,
and often it is just a question of how we allocate scarce
resources and how we draw on other partners. And all of that is
important.
But does USAID have the resources today to meet its
operational demands? How much of this can continue to be just
robbing Peter to pay Paul? Do we not have to have a pretty
fundamental conversation about the growing number of crises
across the world and the fact that today we are spending 1.1
percent of our GDP on foreign aid, when back in the 1950s we
were spending 3 percent of our GDP on foreign aid? At some
point we have got to reckon with that number. Right?
Ms. Smith. Senator, I welcome your comments, and I think
absolutely that we do. I think, if confirmed, I will also
function as a member of the administration that is responsible
for putting together an entire budget and take those factors
into account.
But I think there is something key that you are getting to.
I think we are in a position now to make the case certainly to
the American people. I have been encouraged by the
conversations I have had with members of this committee that
foreign aid is a worthy investment, that we get a return, that
it impacts our influence and our standing around the world, and
that we can prevent more crises than those to which we have to
respond. So I think it would be a wonderful thing to start
making the case that this a worthy investment and one that we
should consider over time increasing. I would be delighted to
work with you on that.
I do also want to say--and I certainly was not attempting
to skirt something, but I also believe that assistance is one
of the tools we have, but it is not the only one. The Agency
has done a phenomenal job at a time when ideally it would have
a much bigger budget, of figuring out, again, how do you
mobilize other people's resources, how do you work with the NGO
community, which has made huge commitments of its own, and how
do we, again, leverage what is now billions of dollars in
private capital. So I think regardless of where the budget is,
that is something that we have got to focus on.
You did mention the word ``operational,'' so I just want to
make one quick plug of something that, if confirmed, I hope
that we can discuss, and that is USAID's operating budget,
which is also one of the key elements of its ability to
function around the world and is absolutely critical. I would
want to rely more fulsomely on the experts in the Agency to
come back to you on that. But that is one of the, if you will,
force multipliers to the effectiveness of the Agency over time.
Senator Murphy. One of the issues that we talked about,
which I would love to hear your thoughts on in open committee,
is the issue of flexibility. One of the things that I routinely
hear from mid-level and upper-level operators in the field is
that partially by internal processes, partially by
congressionally directed earmarks, that we compartmentalize
funding on a geographical basis and then on an operational
basis, a categorical basis such that it is hard to move money
as fast as the crises move our attention.
Are there things that can be done internally? Are there
things that we need to work with you on to make sure that you
have the flexibility to move money as quickly as events on the
ground demand it?
Ms. Smith. Senator, that is an issue I would love to come
back to you on, if confirmed. I think it is vital.
USAID has a lot of people who are masters of figuring out
how you move between the various pieces to move money as
quickly as possible, but also respond to requirements that the
Agency is obligated to and wishes to respond to, whether they
come from the legislative or executive branch. I think if we
could talk about how to provide the Agency with greater
flexibility, that would be of enormous value. I think part of
that equation is also working with you on how USAID can ensure
that it will be fully responsible with that greater
flexibility.
I have known this agency for a long time. I have watched it
go through a lot of permutations. I think it is better
positioned today than at any time I have seen in 20 years to
assume the responsibility for and act on that greater
flexibility. And if that is a conversation that we could have,
if I am confirmed, I would be delighted.
Senator Murphy. And then lastly, I just wanted to get your
thoughts about the way in which USAID can be built more tightly
into the overall national security infrastructure. There is a
really fascinating report that one of your former colleagues,
Gen. Jim Jones, headed. It had about a half a dozen former
generals and admirals, as well as a number of policy-thinkers,
talking about the better ways to integrate both State
Department resources and USAID resources into the strategic
commands to make sure that we have a more coherent conversation
happening out in the field so that we can have a coordinated
response to crises.
I think about the movement of an organization like al-
Shabaab out of Somalia into Kenya. If we had been able to all
think about the ways ahead of time to try to buttress those
sections of Kenya which were vulnerable to the movement of al
Shabaab, we might have been able to prevent a little bit more
of the seepage that ended up happening.
Are there some opportunities to try to connect strategic
commands and USAID? They are some of your biggest boosters,
frankly, and there seems to be a need to maybe have a little
bit more coherence in the field.
Ms. Smith. Well, I think that is a very good point. And the
Department of Defense has been a big champion of USAID largely
for the reasons you suggest. USAID is the agency best
positioned to pursue the prevention that is needed so we have
fewer crises.
I think USAID and the Department of Defense have a very
good relationship. It is one that has expanded including
because of joint responses in humanitarian crises. I know that
on the Sahel and other parts of the world, the two agencies
have together looked at roles and responsibilities but also how
to think about what might be done on the side of prevention.
And I think that is something I am very interested in pursuing
further.
Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Markey.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
Can you give us the 1 minute on geothermal in Ethiopia?
Ms. Smith. Sure. Thank you, Senator.
Geothermal in Ethiopia has a huge potential. All along the
Rift Valley, as you and I discussed, there is the potential to
provide electricity for a huge chunk of the continent. It is
not easy to exploit, but we are finding that there is increased
interest. Power Africa is behind transactions in Kenya and in
Ethiopia that we hope to see significant progress on, including
in the coming weeks. I think it is something that could be a
profound game-changer for the region again.
Senator Markey. We were told by the President of Liberia, a
country of 6.5 million people, that her whole country only has
40 megawatts of electricity.
Ms. Smith. Exactly.
Senator Markey. What can one geothermal facility in
Ethiopia do?
Ms. Smith. You could go from 500 to 1,000 megawatts.
Senator Markey. A thousand megawatts.
Ms. Smith. Potentially. There are lots of megawatts in that
geothermal rift there along the valley, sir.
Senator Markey. Right. So ultimately we are looking at
something that is potentially 25 times bigger--one plant, one
facility--than all of the electricity in Liberia today.
Ms. Smith. But we are looking at some serious impacts. And
again, I think we have got to be mindful of the challenges in
exploitation of geothermal. But I think we are seeing
increasing evidence of its potential, of the interest by
investors, and of the viability of some of these projects. We
still have to focus on the Liberias that do not have that
potential and have the kind of acute shortages you talk about,
particularly at a time when, after having survived decades of
war and now an Ebola epidemic, they are able, fortunately, to
focus again with our Power Africa team on turning the lights on
there.
Senator Markey. The numbers are just so exponentially
larger that they just match up with the cell phone wireless
revolution in Africa. I mean, it is almost like a perfect
analogy of how we are not talking about a doubling or a
tripling. We are talking about something with one facility in
Ethiopia that is 50 times bigger than everything that is going
on in Liberia. So that is something that we just, again,
continually have to focus on and understand that it is
transformational. When a place has all the telecommunications
they need and all of the electricity they need, capitalism,
commercial activity is going to flourish and similarly the
education of the kids, the health of the kids, all the way down
the line.
Let us talk about health systems post-Liberia. What can
USAID do to make sure that there is a better infrastructure in
place on an ongoing basis in these countries so that they can
be the front line and effective in making sure that these
diseases just do not spike out of control?
Ms. Smith. That is a really important question, Senator,
and thank you for asking it. Senator Coons mentioned the DART
team deployed, and even from the initial deployment of that
disaster assistance response team, looking at the health
systems has been a priority, building on some significant
progress made over the years, but obviously insufficient
progress given the impact that the Ebola epidemic has had. I
think there are several things that can be done.
One is transferring some of the capabilities that have been
developed in Liberia out of misfortune to other places and
making sure those are retained. There are now people who are
trained as lab technicians to track the data on an epidemic, to
do some of the treatment and prevention.
The second is part of something called the Global Health
Security Agenda, which was launched by the President with an
eye to doing two things, both getting countries to adhere to
the norms and standards that are required to manage global
health threats, but also and importantly build the capacity of
countries like Liberia to be able to prevent, detect, and
respond to global health threats.
Lastly, I think for USAID, for the Office of the Global
AIDS Coordinator for the CDC, and for all the U.S. Government
agencies that work in health, there have been some important
lessons. I think about the importance of health system
strengthening. This has been a priority since the beginning of
the administration. I will admit it has not been the easiest
thing to market. Health system strengthening really did not
capture a lot of imagination I think until we saw the Ebola
epidemic. But the teams are working now on how we can do as
much as possible----
Senator Markey. Can you take tuberculosis as an example----
Ms. Smith. Yes.
Senator Markey [continuing]. And talk about what USAID can
do in terms of detection and prevention of tuberculosis in the
countries that you have an ability to influence? Can you talk
about that a little bit?
Ms. Smith. I think many of these are the same systems. And
what is needed and I think what USAID does very well across the
board on health is how do you have the education in place,
train the people who you need on the ground, provide the
education, and then put in the extra training and capabilities
that are needed for diagnostics, for treatment, in TB for
sustaining treatment because one of the biggest challenges
there is that if people fall off their treatment, you have got
a recurrence or even worse. So I think, again, it all comes
back to health systems, to training, and to putting in place
those things that enable local communities to play a central
role.
And one last thing on tuberculosis, if I may. It also means
mobilizing other countries to do more because if you look at
where the evidence of tuberculosis is today, much of it is in
the world's poorest countries. A great deal of it is in the
BRICS. And so I think the other piece is going back and
pressing other countries to do more.
Senator Markey. And finally, USAID has partnered with MIT
in working on a comprehensive initiative on technology
evaluation in order to ensure that we are using the smartest
technologies effectively in order to aid in development in
these countries. Can you talk a little bit about that and how
we can continue to advance that effort to maximize working
smarter, not harder to extract all of the economic
opportunities in these countries?
Ms. Smith. Senator, I am not familiar with that particular
project. I am familiar with the extraordinary work that has
been done by--if I am confirmed--my predecessor.
Senator Markey. You have my vote.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Shah is a real expert in science and technology and did
a great deal to create, as you know, the Global Development
Lab.
I think the partnerships with universities are key. Those
are already yielding significant results. I think how to use
data more effectively both in running the organization but also
in terms of tracking solutions and what is working and what is
not.
The Grand Challenges that USAID has run have been some of
their greatest successes. My personal favorite is one that was
to develop a set of protective gear for people who are working
in environments like Ebola epidemics where they can work for
longer periods than 45 minutes. It was Johns Hopkins and a
wedding dressmaker in Maryland that came up with the solution
on that.
I think there is enormous potential out of what has been
done to bring science, technology, and innovation into USAID. I
think the challenge is to look at how we can get some of these
things to scale.
Senator Markey. I think your whole life has prepared you to
sit in that chair, and I think our country and the world is
lucky to have you being willing to take on this job. So thank
you so much.
Ms. Smith. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. I am sure that Senator Markey knows that his
whole life has prepared him to sit in his chair. [Laughter.]
So with that, Senator Cardin I know has some additional
questions.
Senator Cardin. If I could return to a point I raised
earlier from the hearing we had yesterday in the East Asia and
The Pacific Committee dealing with capacity-building and using
USAID programs as they are related to capacity-building for
trade, I want to talk a little bit about labor capacity issues
and how you see the tools you have available being used to
maintain and expand those opportunities.
If we move forward--and I hope we do--with the agreement
with the Trans-Pacific Partnership, there are several countries
there that have significant challenges as relating to their
capacity to comply with a quality trade agreement such as TPP,
particularly on labor issues. How do you see your
aggressiveness in using the labor capacity tools that are
available to help us meet these needs?
Ms. Smith. Senator, this is something I have talked to
USAID about. USAID has a long history of working with labor
organizations to build up to both norms and standards and build
capacity. I think there is every intention of continuing those
programs. If it is possible to expand those, I think that is
worth looking at. But this is something I think the Agency has
got a long track record of working on around the world and in
Asia, and I certainly think in the Asia-Pacific that is a place
where, if confirmed, we would certainly want to continue to do
that.
I would be happy to talk to you further and get your
thoughts and more details on any specific ideas you may have.
Senator Cardin. Well, I appreciate your commitment on this.
I think it is going to require the agency's initiatives in some
of these areas, and I look forward to working with you in that
regard.
Ms. Smith. That would be great.
Senator Cardin. There has been some conversation about the
use of the Global Development Lab. I mentioned it and Senator
Coons mentioned it. Do you have thoughts as to how that program
could be strengthened so that we can leverage the program for
stronger involvement from the private sector in helping achieve
the missions of USAID?
Ms. Smith. Sure. I think the partnerships that the Global
Development Lab has already built are part of what is going to
anchor it and allow it to succeed. One of those is, again, with
universities around the country, and also with the private
sector. I think there is some real potential in looking at how
we can take some of these innovations to scale. There is the
capacity within USAID to provide some initial small capital to
entrepreneurs, for example, or to ideas that seem to be viable
enough to work. I think part of the challenge will be then
getting with the private sector to figure out how we can take
some of these things to market. And that is something I would
very much like to do. I will rely on its experts, if confirmed,
to determine what the best examples might be.
But I genuinely believe that this kind of lab, that kind of
innovation, those kind of entrepreneurs or the ideas that have
come out of grand challenges--that if we use our convening
power, the relationships that the Global Development Lab
already has to work with the private sector to take these
solutions to market--we will not only innovate, but do
something the lab was built for and that is to get to scale.
Senator Cardin. I think it is excellent. I would also urge
you to put a bigger spotlight on what you are doing. I think
this is a story that is not well understood yet, particularly
in our country. So I think you should. This is a success, and
you should really put a spotlight on it.
One last point. Senator Corker and I have had many
conversations about moving the President's nominees through our
committee in an efficient way. And today's hearing is an
indication of us moving forward on nominations.
It is my understanding that there are several senior
positions in USAID that require Senate confirmations where
nominations have not been yet submitted to the United States
Senate, including the top position in Africa and some others.
If you are confirmed, can we have your commitment that you will
do everything you can to make sure that we get these
appointments in a timely way? It is frustrating for many of us
who are pushing to say we need to confirm positions when the
administration has not submitted their nominees.
Ms. Smith. Yes. I will happily make you that commitment,
sir.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
The Chairman. I am glad to see that he is pushing in two
directions, not just one. [Laughter.]
Senator Perdue.
Senator Perdue. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have one last
question.
Ms. Smith, with your operational background, I cannot
resist this and I ran out of time earlier. But Senator Murphy
reminded me just how important it is that we set priorities. We
mentioned that we are only spending about 1 percent of our
budget as opposed to maybe 3 percent in the past. I want to
look at that. I am not knowledgeable about the 3 percent.
But I do look at the last 6 years where we have spent $21
trillion in our Government. We borrowed $8 trillion of that.
That means of the $20 billion, which I believe is in 2015's
budget for USAID--and put that in perspective. The State
Department is $51 billion. So this is $20 billion of the $51
million. That means that we borrowed $8 billion in order to
meet needs around the world.
And this goes back to my question about how do we get other
players to step up and how can we leverage what we are doing.
But the reality is right now we are borrowing 40 percent of
what we are using to support philanthropy around the world. I
do not know any other country in history that has ever done
that.
And so the question I have that comes behind that is,
operationally how do you look at the priorities? Right now,
five efforts, as I understand it--and I would love to be
corrected, but I think this is right. Five programs represent
90 percent of that $20 billion. Health, humanitarian needs--
health is the third. Humanitarian needs is about 20 percent.
Democracy and governance is 13 percent. So those three things
are about two-thirds of the money we are spending, or about $13
trillion. Economic growth and agriculture are only about 20
percent, a little more than 20, about 23 percent.
So the question is--you do not have to answer today because
you have not had a chance to get into the budget and all that.
But one of the things I would look forward to is an active
conversation about what you see the allocation needing to be
relative to the needs that are out there, the objectives and
the mission of USAID, given that 40 percent of what we are
funding is borrowed. I mean, that puts a perspective on it I
think that makes--it just puts every dollar in play relative to
how important it is that we make every dollar count. So would
you respond to that please?
Ms. Smith. I will. I also took note of your saying that you
would be happy to talk to me about this later when I have had a
chance to review the budget in great detail.
I think this issue of prioritization is key. And again, I
do not want to understate how difficult it is. USAID has a lot
of important initiatives and programs.
What I would really like to do is sit down with the men and
women who run these programs both here in Washington and in the
field, get their honest assessment of what they think is the
most effective, what they think should be prioritized, how they
think about that, be able to work that through with the
agencies, with others in administration who have views on this,
and come back to you and talk it through.
Senator Perdue. That is acceptable. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you.
If there are no other questions--do you have any, Senator
Markey? You are good? I just have a couple and we will close.
Ms. Smith. Sure.
The Chairman. Again, thank you for your testimony and your
willingness to serve in this capacity.
I was interested in your exchange with Senator Markey and
just the order of magnitude change that can take place when we
have power production of that magnitude in a country with so
little. And we have so many countries in Africa that have that
kind of situation. Sometimes administrations on both sides of
the aisle try to tout the amount of output that is created, but
as you know--and we talked about this in the office--what is
important is to ensure you have a distribution system, and you
have that power, and you have a cost recovery mechanism or a
tariff system in place so that it can be sustained for the long
haul and will be there. So many of us have seen--I know you
have seen--projects that were completed but they serve no
purpose.
I wonder if you could just talk a little bit about that?
Ms. Smith. Yes. I think there a couple of issues there,
Senator. And thank you for the question.
One of the things that Power Africa also focuses on is some
of the policy issues, which are key to sustainability. So I
think that is vital.
I also think that something, if confirmed, we can do more
of and a better job of is looking at that sustainability up
front and making sure that the policies are in place, figuring
out things like recurrent expenditures that sometimes are not
factored in are factored in so that we know that we are not
investing in something that 5, 10, 15 years later is going to
prove to be dormant or ineffective. So I think that is
critically important. It is something that is a priority of
mine.
With respect to Power Africa in particular, one of the
great things about having not only USAID but all of these other
departments and agencies involved is that it is a real
opportunity to get to the policy issues that are necessary
alongside those very exciting investments to make sure that
these are sustainable over time, and that the investments
include all of the other cost recovery and pieces that you
mentioned.
The Chairman. While you were at the NSC, you praised the
administration's transparency efforts. And we noticed that with
the foreign assistance website, we still are not getting full
reporting from all Federal agencies relative to that. And while
I am sure our friends in China have access to that data, I
wonder if you would----
[Laughter.]
The Chairman [continuing]. If you would commit to going
ahead and bringing that up to a full-scale basis and make sure
that all of that reporting is taking place?
Ms. Smith. Sure. Senator, I will continue to work on that.
And I will confess to you that several colleagues and I made a
priority of really looking at foreign aid transparency. I think
in all honesty, we were not fully aware of what we were getting
into when you look at the complexity of the full range of
departments and agencies that provide foreign aid and their
different systems and how one translates all of that
information. That is a work in progress. It is something I will
certainly lend my support to and continue to work on. And I
appreciate your support for it because I think it is absolutely
vital.
The Chairman. Well, thank you for being here today. I
appreciate the time you took with committee members in advance.
Without objection, if the record could remain open until
close of business Friday and if you would respond to those
questions, we would appreciate it.
Ms. Smith. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. And without further ado, the meeting is
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:23 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Gayle Smith, Nominated to be Administrator of the United
States Agency for International Development, to Questions from Members
of the Committee
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator corker
Water, sanitation, and hygiene
Question. The 2012 U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)
determined that a lack of access to clean water in the developing world
will increase the risk of state failure and global instability over the
next decade, which in turn will pose strategic issues for the United
States. In light of the recent passage of the Water for the World Act
and its emphasis on prioritizing help for the most in need, what
efforts would you undertake to ensure water and sanitation funding is
not used as a strategic bargaining chip but that appropriate
prioritization takes place as required by law, increasing access to
clean drinking water and sanitation where it's needed most, as part of
a global strategy to engender goodwill toward the United States and
reduce the risk of global instability?
Answer. Thank you for your leadership on this issue, including your
sponsorship of the Senator Paul Simon Water for the World Act, which I
was pleased to see signed into law.
It is my understanding that the act aligns with USAID's 2013 Water
and Development Strategy, in that both prioritize USAID's water
investments based on (1) country needs (targeting countries with the
least access to safe drinking water, improved sanitation and hygiene,
and highest rates of death of children under 5 due to diarrheal
diseases); and (2) opportunities (focusing on countries with host-
government commitment to supporting water, sanitation, and hygiene).
As you may know, the majority of USAID's priority WASH countries
and the majority of the Agency's WASH funding can be found in sub-
Saharan Africa, a region that has historically suffered from the lowest
rates of access to safe drinking water and sanitation in the world.
The country prioritization and funding trends both demonstrate
USAID's commitment to supporting the water needs of the very poor, and
providing a foundation for sound governance of water resources that
helps contribute to stability in priority countries.
If confirmed, I will focus on sustainably expanding access to safe
water, sanitation, and hygiene to the neediest countries in an
increasingly water scarce world and look forward to consulting with the
Congress and relevant stakeholders to ensure we are meeting the intent
of the Water for the World Act.
Freedom promotion
Question. Where do you see democracy and liberty promotion fitting
into the agenda of USAID?
a. What percentage of USAID funds and staff time should be
spent on democracy and liberty promotion?
b. How does that compare to the current allocation of staff
time and funds for democracy and liberty promotion?
Answer. Democracy promotion is central to development, and an
integral part of the U.S. national security strategy. This is
highlighted in the President's two published strategies as well as in
the two Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Reviews issued by the
State Department and USAID. Within USAID, a new strategy on democracy,
human rights, and governance (DRG) frames the importance of an
integrated approach to programming within the sector, and equally on a
holistic approach between this sector and the economic and social
sectors. If confirmed, I intend to make democracy promotion a top
priority.
As stated during my testimony, to advance implementation of the new
DRG strategy, if confirmed, I will support a greater presence of DRG
officers in the field. Democracy officers are on the front lines each
day, convening and networking civil society organizations, finding
innovative ways to promote human rights, and working to ensure our
programs in health, food security, climate change, and economic growth
incorporate elements of citizen participation and government
accountability.
With respect to USAID managed and comanaged accounts, the
President's FY 2016 request includes a substantial increase in
democracy funding when compared to the FY 2015 request. If confirmed, I
look forward to reviewing funding and staffing levels and working with
Congress to ensure appropriate resources are available for this
critical area.
Question. As space for civil society continues to shrink globally,
how will you put President Obama's ``Stand with Civil Society''
initiative into action?
Answer. USAID has been a key player in the President's Stand with
Civil Society agenda, a global call to action to support, defend, and
sustain civil society amid a rising tide of restrictions on its
operations globally. As a result of Stand with Civil Society, USAID has
augmented programs that strengthen legal and regulatory environments
for civil society; held numerous consultations all over the world with
civil society; and made bold calls to strengthen regional coalitions,
improve donor coordination and promote innovative partnerships, and
engage local governments to collaborate with civil society to solve
community problems.
USAID is also exploring innovative ways to support civil society.
For example, in partnership with the Government of Sweden and private
philanthropy, the Agency is supporting an effort to connect civil
society across the globe through the Civil Society Innovation
Initiative. Through a constructive, cocreation process with civil
society, USAID and its partners will work together with local and
regional CSOs to design up to six regional Hubs that will be connected
at the global level. These regional Hubs, intended to add value to and
augment existing support to civil society, will encourage cooperation,
innovation, research, learning, and peer-to-peer exchanges. They will
feature virtual and physical components that can aggregate existing
tools and resources, including on leadership capacity and regionally
based resource mobilization, as well as serve as a support platform for
civic activists that could provide on-demand legal aid.
These are the types of activities I will continue to support to
ensure that USAID is supporting the U.S. Government's efforts to
respond to the backlash on democratic principles occurring around the
world.
Program impact
Question. U.S. assistance has had many successes, but too often
USAID is focused on dollars spent, rather than impact. If confirmed,
how will you push USAID to be focused on development outcomes?
Answer. In order to maximize the impact of every development
dollar, and as part of the USAID Forward reform agenda, USAID has
introduced new operational policies related to strategic planning,
program design, and monitoring and evaluation. As you know, this suite
of reforms was designed to increase the Agency's strategic focus and
development impact by ensuring that programs are designed to respond to
local contexts, and that USAID learns from experience and adapts
programs accordingly for better development outcomes.
USAID's Evaluation Policy, released in 2011, is one of the key
operational policies that is bringing new methodologies for measuring
impact to the design and evaluation of development activities. Since
2011, over 950 evaluations, and expanded training in evaluation for
over 1,400 USAID staff, have bolstered active management by missions
and operating units in evidence-based decisionmaking.
USAID has strengthened its ability to plan and implement
strategically, to monitor and evaluate impact, and continuously feed
what is learned back into planning and implementation processes to
improve outcomes. Another operational reform that has strengthened
strategic planning for improved outcomes is the use of Country
Development Cooperation Strategies (CDCS) to ensure analysis of changes
in country situations and status in the medium term, and support
evaluations and interim Agencywide assessments to inform decisions
about adjustments in resource allocations. If confirmed as
Administrator, I will work to further institutionalize these reforms
across the Agency.
Question. What are your thoughts on innovative pay-for-performance
contracts, such as Cash-on-Delivery Aid, where U.S. taxpayers would
only be footing the bills for measurable achievements?
Answer. I understand that USAID is committed to utilizing the most
effective and efficient means for incentivizing, attaining, and
sustaining development results.
Examples include:
(A) Acquisition and Assistance: For acquisition (contracts), USAID
has several options to incentivize contractors by tying payment to
performance, including cost plus award fee, fixed price award fee, cost
plus incentives fee, and fixed price incentive fee contracts. For
assistance (grants and cooperative agreements), a fixed amount award,
which was previously referred to by USAID as a fixed obligation grant,
is the main pay-for-performance mechanism. I understand that USAID
strives to use these mechanisms when appropriate.
(B) Government-to-Government (G2G) Assistance: Most of USAID
assistance to local governments is ``projectized'' which means that the
Agency's funding is for a specific project, not simply budget support,
and financed via either cost reimbursement, fixed amount reimbursement,
or resource transfers (i.e., cash transfers in a few select countries).
If confirmed, I would be interested in looking at other innovative
pay-for-performance approaches, including Cash on Delivery.
If confirmed, I am committed to achieving results that sustain in
the most efficient and effective way. However, in pursuing this results
focus, I also want to ensure that the approaches we use do not
undermine or distort current systems such that the countries on their
own are not able to sustain this assistance.
Africa
Question. At a time when China and other countries are making huge
inroads into Africa, often displacing American influence, how would you
advance American interests in this competitive environment?
Answer. I believe America can continue to assert influence as a
global leader in Africa, even as sub-Saharan Africa attracts
significant investment from China and many other countries. At the
U.S.-Africa Leader's Summit (ALS) President Obama told the largest
gathering of African leaders ever held in Washington, ``We don't look
to Africa simply for its natural resources. We recognize Africa for its
greatest resource which is its people and its talents and its
potential.'' The United States relationship with Africa is about much
more than extracting minerals from the ground for our growth. The
United States seeks to build partnerships that create jobs and
opportunity for all our peoples, and unleash the next era of African
growth. The U.S approach provides a mix of investments in Africa
representing a comprehensive American agenda that promotes influence in
the forms of democracy, individual liberties and respect for the rule
of law as well as soft power influence where we have a significant
undisputed edge in working with African governments.
USAID can demonstrate leadership and advance American interests in
Africa through development programming that engages and empowers
Africans. USAID invests heavily in programs that ensure Africans have a
stake in their own development and continues to engage in Africa on a
large scale. In its first year, the Power Africa initiative made
significant progress toward achieving its initial goal of adding 10,000
megawatts (MWs) and 20 million business and household electrical
connections in six countries in sub-Saharan Africa. During the ALS,
President Obama announced a tripling of Power Africa's goals--Power
Africa partners would work together to add 30,000 MW and 60 million
connections across all of sub-Saharan Africa. Through Power Africa,
USAID is coordinating a total of 12 U.S. Government agencies and
working with over 100 private sector partners, multilateral development
institutions, bilateral partners, and African governments to increase
power generation across sub-Saharan Africa. To date, Power Africa has
helped projects expected to generate over 4,100 megawatts of
electricity generation capacity reach financial close.
Through the Feed the Future initiative, USAID is working with
African governments, the African Union, and the private sector in
Africa and abroad to address the root causes of hunger, poverty, and
food crises. U.S. leadership is ensuring that the fight against hunger
and poverty is a global endeavor. Indeed, our L'Aquila commitment of
$3.5 billion over 3 years, which the United States met and surpassed,
spurred other partners to pledge more than $18.5 billion. And the
United States was instrumental in the development of five key
principles that were subsequently adopted at the Rome World Summit on
Food Security in November 2009. Now known as the Rome Principles, they
constitute the foundation for collective, global action on agricultural
development and food security. If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID
continues to show such leadership on the continent through bilateral
and regional partnerships with African institutions, and through the
USG's power to convene global responses to African challenges.
Through the Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI), the U.S.
Government is empowering a new generation of young Africans to
contribute to solving challenges in their communities and around the
world. YALI works in partnership with a robust network of stakeholders
from across the continent and in the United States to support young
African leaders as they spur growth and prosperity, strengthen
democratic governance, and enhance peace and security across Africa.
This initiative also builds lasting linkages between the United States
and Africa in government, business and civil society.
At the same time, since China is the largest single trading partner
with the African region, it is important that the United States engage
the Chinese to channel global development resource flows toward more
transparent, accountable, and transformative development objectives in
line with our values. Through this engagement, the USG has an
opportunity to encourage compliance with international standards for
environmental and social risk assessments. If confirmed, I will work
with the Department of State on developing a strategic framework for
enhancing this engagement.
As outlined in the President Obama's U.S. Strategy toward sub-
Saharan Africa, the United States commitment to Africa is long-standing
and deep. The United States has invested in development partnerships
with Africans to foster sustained economic growth, promote food
security, increase resilience to climate change, and improve the
capacity of countries and communities to address HIV/AIDS, malaria and
other health threats. This is the foundation of a continuing strong
relationship between the U.S. and African nations.
Yemen
Question. Earlier this year, USAID suspended its conflict
resolution programming in Yemen due to an escalation of conflict. What
are your views of the proper role for USAID in Yemen and how USAID
might be able to restart these important programs?
Answer. As you know, USAID supports local, civilian-led conflict
mitigation programs and efforts to foster dialogue throughout many
countries worldwide. Yemen currently faces a humanitarian crisis, with
conditions deteriorating rapidly, and USAID is focused on addressing
this crisis through its continued life-saving humanitarian assistance.
Since FY 2014, the Agency has provided $158 million in humanitarian
assistance to conflict-affected and vulnerable populations in Yemen.
USAID works through trusted humanitarian partners that are seasoned
professionals with many decades of experience working in conflict zones
and difficult operating environments, such as Somalia and Afghanistan.
In light of the extremely difficult security and operational
situation in Yemen, some USAID programs, including social and economic
development programs, have been suspended. The safety and security of
USAID implementing partners, beneficiaries, and local staff in Yemen is
USAID's first priority and the Agency does not want to put them at risk
unnecessarily. I understand that USAID has worked diligently to ensure
that this suspension will allow the Agency to keep programs in place so
that it can quickly restart activities--including conflict management
and mitigation activities--at any point when the situation is
permissive, civil society partners can meet in a safe environment, and
USAID can ensure sufficient program oversight.
Risk assessments missing in program planning
Question. While USAID has increased its partnerships with local
partners in country-led programming, the Government Accountability
Office reports risk assessments that are carried out by USAID are many
times not used during program planning in order to mitigate those
risks. How would you address this as Administrator?
Answer. It is my understanding that USAID has addressed the
concerns raised in the GAO report regarding the alignment of its
fiduciary risk assessments with its program planning process. If
confirmed as Administrator, I am committed to creating the conditions
whereby countries can lead, resource, and sustain their own
development. To the extent that effective government systems are key to
sustaining desired results, under my leadership, the Agency will
continue to invest directly in those systems to improve their function.
I will ensure that the Agency continues to conduct in-depth fiduciary
risk assessments at the country level, as well as at the institutional
level for those organizations in which the Agency is directly
investing.
My understanding is that in 2014 USAID revised its internal
regulations to align its processes for fiduciary risk assessment and
program planning, and accompanied that revision with a worldwide
training program. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that USAID staff
worldwide are familiar with and implementing these regulations so that
these fiduciary risk assessments are used in program planning in order
to mitigate such risks.
Grants vs. contracts
Question. In order to achieve maximum accountability for results,
efficient use of resources, and the incorporation of lessons learned
from prior development efforts, what do you think the appropriate
balance is between contracts, grants, and cooperative agreements in
acquisitions associated with development?
Answer. To achieve maximum accountability and results, I believe
that the appropriate choice of instrument will vary from activity to
activity. The decision to use a grant, contract, or cooperative
agreement should be based on a rigorous program design in which
intended results, efficiencies, and lessons learned are incorporated.
I understand that USAID has a history of robust use of all three
mechanisms with assistance instruments such as grants and cooperative
agreements receiving 60-70 percent of USAID obligations and contracts
receiving 30-40 percent. I also understand that USAID's official policy
states that there is no preference for acquisition instruments over
assistance instruments or vice versa.
In addition, I believe it is important to ensure that the choice of
instrument is made in accordance with principles found in the Federal
Grant and Cooperative Agreement Act.
Please be assured that if confirmed, I will ensure that results,
efficiencies, and lessons learned are used in each of these
implementing mechanisms.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator cardin
Country ownership
Question. Americans are proud that our country is the world's most
generous provider of assistance to save lives in emergencies and help
people and countries work their way out of poverty. Over the years this
assistance has helped other countries achieve some incredible results--
including 1 billion people being lifted out of poverty in this century.
How do we make sure that our aid is leaving lasting results
that countries can build upon, so they can grow their
economies, strengthen their institutions and the rule of law,
and get to the point where they are eventually funding their
needs with their own economic growth?
What administrative reforms can we expect you to prioritize
to ensure that we make sure we are getting the furthest mile on
every U.S. taxpayer dollar going overseas--and what can
Congress do to alleviate the pressure to burn money too
quickly, measure quantitative outputs versus impact, etc.?
How would you invest to increase the impact of successful
efforts like the Local Solutions initiative?
Answer. USAID is committed to creating the conditions whereby
countries can lead, resource, and sustain their own development, a
commitment that I share and will prioritize, if confirmed. I agree that
country ownership--mutually agreed-upon priorities, direct
implementation through local systems as the default choice, and
domestic resourcing by local governments, civil society, and the
private sector--should be at the core of how USAID does business. My
understanding is that the Agency is delivering on this commitment
through the following organizational and programmatic reforms, which I
will prioritize if confirmed:
The Agency has put in place policies and a program planning
process that enable it to project results over a longer
timeframe and align its staffing and resources accordingly.
USAID is ensuring that its country strategies and project
designs prioritize and measure sustainability through country
ownership, regardless of the sector. This increasingly entails
broad local stakeholder involvement in the Agency's planning
processes. It also entails analysis (e.g. political economy
analysis) and action (i.e. improved governance) on the
constraints to sustainability, all of which may not be fully in
the Agency's manageable control.
The Agency has put in place the appropriate controls to
prudently invest directly in local governments, civil society,
and bolstering the private sector (as relevant) to ensure that
those stakeholders are accountable, effective, and can sustain
results on their own.
USAID has introduced new guidance and methodologies for
monitoring and evaluating project performance. USAID programs
are closely and actively monitored in-country--including
through the use of objective, third-party evaluations--to track
results at every level (input, output, outcome) and to make
room for midcourse correction when changes are needed. In
addition, through the use of rigorous methodologies the Agency
is able to evaluate the impact of its programs and the extent
to which outcomes can be attributed to USAID interventions.
The Agency has almost doubled its Foreign Service staffing
to increase its ability to engage directly with local
governments, civil society, and private sector; negotiate
policy reforms; leverage the local private sector; build
capacity; innovate; and manage its assistance programs.
USAID is promoting the mobilization of local resources in
countries where it works through tax modernization;
coinvestments and guarantees with the local private sector;
budding philanthropy; and alternative business models such as
social enterprises and social impact investment.
Health workforce
Question. What is the overarching vision and strategy for helping
the Ebola-affected countries and other developing country partners to
build a well-trained, well-equipped and well-supported health workforce
that can stop threats like Ebola, and at the same time help achieve
other major priorities like ending preventable child and maternal
deaths?
Answer. USAID has worked closely with the national governments of
the Ebola-affected countries as well as with other U.S. Government
agencies and bilateral and multilateral donors to develop a health
country plan for each country, which directly supports national
strategies and reaches the most vulnerable populations. USAID's
programs focus on restoring non-Ebola essential primary health services
delivery while supporting the rehabilitation of health systems,
including the capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to future
outbreaks before they become epidemics, in line with our Global Health
Security Agenda.
To support service delivery, USAID will focus its efforts on health
promotion and behavior change and communication at the community level.
These efforts will help to reduce the fear of returning to health
clinics and promote primary health services, particularly maternal and
child health services. Support will also focus on the reopening of
community health facilities in USAID-targeted communities which follow
new established standards and norms for infection prevention and
control, training of health care workers, and ensuring the availability
of essential health commodities at the facility level. Additional
support will also be provided for service delivery through existing
nontraditional, community platforms, such as national health weeks and
immunization campaigns,which will help to serve as a stop-gap measure
until community-based facilities are up and running.
USAID will focus on a variety of activities to improve health
systems in both the short- and long-term in each country. Priority
programs will include capacity-building for health care worker training
programs to better support the recruitment, training, supervision, and
retention of health care workers at all levels. Support will also be
provided for curriculum development, training tools and materials,
helping to develop a professional training track for community health
care workers, and integration of new health workers recruited and
trained during the crisis. Significant efforts will also be made to
support the supply chain management efforts from forecasting and
procurements to storage and delivery at the community level. Additional
efforts will be considered to help support the local Ministries of
Health on governance, health care financing (to help manage the
additional influx of resources from donors), management and oversight.
All three affected countries have requested support in setting up an
infection prevention and control unit within the Ministry of Health to
ensure the quality control and implementation of standards and norms
for infection prevention and control implementation throughout all
clinical settings.
USAID-supported recovery efforts will build upon systems and
activities put in place during the emergency response efforts to
further enhance each country's capacity in detecting, preventing, and
responding to further outbreaks of Ebola and other infectious disease
threats.
These efforts, combined with the efforts of other donors, will
collectively support the national recovery strategies in each country
and help to support overall efforts to end preventable maternal and
child death.
Maternal and child health
Question. In 2012, the United States led on the Survival Call to
Action roadmap that identified key barriers that we needed to address
to bend the curve on ending child deaths and increase child survival
and health.
How is the United States moving this agenda forward?
How can you deepen or expand that commitment or vision?
How will you ensure that we are working with the highest-
burden countries and promoting equity for children across the
globe to ensure we are reaching all children?
Answer. Since 2009, the Obama administration has been strategically
focusing its maternal and child health programs on countries with the
highest burdens of maternal, newborn, and child deaths and where the
United States had the opportunity to make a difference in this outcome.
By focusing on countries and populations with the highest need, U.S.
programs have helped save millions of lives, contributing to greater
equity and more inclusive development. In USAID's 24 priority countries
that account for more than 70 percent of global child and maternal
deaths, nearly 800,000 more children survived in 2013 than in 2008,
contributing to a cumulative total 2.4 million lives saved.
USAID's 2014 report ``Acting on the Call: Ending Preventable Child
and Maternal Deaths'' outlined an evidence-based plan to accelerate
progress in USAID priority countries-sharpening field programs,
realizing efficiencies, and improving accountability to yield the
greatest number of lives saved, while building systems and partnerships
to sustain progress. Building on this momentum, USAID appointed a Child
and Maternal Survival Coordinator in 2015, focused on: (1) continuing
to sharpen the Agency's work toward Ending Preventable Child and
Maternal Deaths; (2) intensifying external engagement with Congress and
partners, advocates, civil society, faith groups, and partner country
leaders that are critical to progress; and (3) increasing financing for
EPCMD.
USAID is working to accelerate its action through a new framework
to track success, support missions, and ensure that resources are in
place to sustain the effort. By enhancing existing internal processes
such as the annual operational plan development, USAID can improve its
performance and ensure that our investments are focusing on the highest
priorities. Dashboards have been developed to rigorously measure
progress at both the outcome level and input level. The dashboards
facilitate a more organized, coordinated system for tracking, and
managing progress, and are a supporting tool in a comprehensive
approach to measuring progress.
I understand USAID is working to release the second ``Acting on the
Call'' report in summer 2015, following up on commitments and targets
set in the 2014 report. Through dashboards and these annual reports,
USAID is holding itself and its partners accountable for accelerating
our impact on ending preventable child and maternal deaths.
Ending Preventable Child and Maternal Deaths cannot be accomplished
by USAID alone. In 2012, the Governments of Ethiopia, India, and the
United States, in collaboration with UNICEF, hosted the Call to Action
to unite the global community around this achievable goal. The same
partners convened again in 2014 to assess progress and identify
challenges. This year, the Government of India will host a followup
global conference in August, cohosted by the Governments of Ethiopia
and the United States, and UNICEF. Since 2012, 20 governments have
committed to--and most have developed--national plans to accelerate
progress, set clear priorities and costs and scorecards to
systematically track outcomes.
Since the beginning of the Obama administration, the U.S.
Government has increased investments in global child and maternal
survival with the strong, bipartisan support of Congress. Worldwide,
government health expenditures and donor contributions have seen
meaningful growth. There still remains a gap in financing needed to
build on progress to date and bridging that gap will require strategies
that incorporate domestic resource mobilization, global engagement,
USAID's Health Financing Framework, and targeted country-specific
interventions. As countries experience unprecedented economic growth, a
new transitional model of aid can better mobilize domestic public,
private, and other innovative sources of funding to create a bridge
toward equity, sustainability, and self-sufficiency. If confirmed, I am
committed to building on the successes of USAID's efforts to end
preventable maternal and child deaths.
Question. As you know, land tenure is a critical element of food
security. However, smallholder farmers, particularly women farmers, are
often at risk of having their land seized without their consent in
large land acquisitions. This has been a challenge in efforts to
promote food security and helped drive the development of the land
tenure guidelines, which I am pleased that the United States supported.
What are your thoughts on how USAID can ensure a strategy
that includes participation of small-scale farmer's
organizations and prioritizes their needs?
Will USAID continue to support policies favoring large
agribusiness and large-scale land acquisition in Africa?
How will USAID avoid being involved in projects that fail
to respect the legitimate tenure rights of local people,
especially in post-disaster or post-conflict assistance where
communities are especially vulnerable?
What role do you see for the U.S. Government/USAID in
fostering increased investments by donor and host governments
in the agricultural sector of countries facing food insecurity,
specifically investments geared toward benefiting smallholder
farmers?
Answer. I fully agree that land tenure is a critical element of
food security. Indeed, smallholder farmers, particularly women farmers,
are often at risk of having their land seized without their consent in
large land acquisitions. This has been a challenge in efforts to
promote food security and helped drive the development of the land
tenure guidelines you reference.
USAID has taken steps to ensure that land-based investments are
responsible, inclusive, and sensitive to the interests and concerns of
local communities. USAID supports efforts to combat hunger, poverty,
and malnutrition through the U.S. Government's Feed the Future
initiative, which prioritizes improving smallholder farmer access to
tools, technologies, and markets as they are the backbone of rural
economies. If confirmed, I will ensure that Feed the Future continues
to prioritize country ownership, and backs strategies developed by host
country governments with input and ongoing engagement across a range of
important stakeholders, including smallholder farmer organizations,
local private sector, and research organizations, to ensure inclusive
agricultural growth.
USAID, through Feed the Future, supports the principles of the New
Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition, a shared commitment among
African governments, donors, development partners, and the private
sector that was launched in 2012 to encourage responsible private
sector engagement in promoting inclusive growth in the agriculture
sector for sustainable impact against poverty and malnutrition. If
confirmed, I will ensure that the Agency continues to reinforce efforts
to create an enabling environment for responsible investment that
include commitments among participating parties to adhere to the
Voluntary Guidelines on the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land,
Fisheries and Forests in the Context of National Food Security.
I understand that USAID has developed Operational Guidelines for
Responsible Land-Based Investment, which serve as guidance to the
private sector on how to ensure that land-based investments protect
local communities and do not displace or disadvantage local
populations. Through training and technical assistance, research and
evaluation, policy reform, and pilot projects, USAID is committed to
implementing the principles set forth in the Principles for Responsible
Investment in Agriculture and Food Systems and Voluntary Guidelines for
the Responsible Governance of Tenure of Land, Fisheries, and Forests.
These international law instruments create important standards of
practice that protect people and communities and create an enabling
environment that promotes broad-based economic growth and reduces
extreme poverty. If confirmed, I will promote the full utilization of
these instruments in all USAID's economic growth programs.
USAID plays a lead role globally in promoting agriculture sector
and food security investments through development partnerships at all
levels. Data indicate that the agriculture sector is more than twice as
effective in reducing poverty and increasing food security as other
economic growth activities. A focus on reducing poverty and
undernutrition requires a clear focus on improving the status of
smallholder farmers. If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID investments
focus clearly on the needs and opportunities of small-scale farming
families and communities, where the great majority of the poor and
food-insecure live. With its emphasis on sustainability through
country-led partnerships, I understand that Feed the Future has helped
spur significant increases in host-country investments in agriculture
and food security. At their recent summit in Malabo for example,
Africa's leaders adopted agriculture and food security as a main
development focus, committing to invest 10 percent of national budgets
in agriculture. Evidence-based partnerships are occurring in other
food-insecure regions as well. Feed the Future is clearly contributing
to reductions in both poverty and child stunting in countries where
USAID works. If confirmed as USAID's Administrator, I will strengthen
partnerships with both beneficiary countries, donor countries, and
other investors to ensure that a clear priority on agriculture and food
security continues to emphasize gains in small-farm communities.
USAID is uniquely placed to drive gains for smallholder farmers,
producers, and rural families that work in goods and services around
agriculture-based value chains. Through partnerships with the U.S.
university community for example, Feed the Future Innovation Labs are
leading the way in developing new technologies and sustainable
management practices that focus on increasing productivity and reducing
risk in small-scale farming. Through global research alliances that
link scientists and students in the United States with counterparts in
partner countries and key international research organizations, USAID
is leveraging the best of global science to enhance the lives and
livelihoods of rural producer communities across Africa, Asia and Latin
America. If confirmed, I will continue and enhance a focus on
increasing both productivity and profitability of their enterprises and
the private sector value chains that depend on them. I will work to
ensure that USAID investments continue to drive agriculture and food
security gains in ways that also enhance employment opportunities for
the young--men and women--both on farm and off.
Countering violent extremism
Question. Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) has emerged as a top
White House priority, as evidenced by the February summit. And the
State Department just released the Quadrennial Diplomacy and
Development Review, which highlighted a CVE strategy that stressed the
need for good governance and the importance of addressing corruption.
What were the key outcomes/take-aways of the Kenyan CVE
summit?
How will the strategies discussed there inform broader
prevention efforts in sub-Saharan Africa?
In your view, what are USAID's strongest tools when it
comes to CVE? How does USAID plan to utilize tools to address
the root causes of radicalization in the West African and Sahel
contexts to counter the ideology of groups such as Boko Haram
and al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM)?
Answer. The Kenya Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) summit will be
held in Nairobi on June 25-28. This will be one of several regional
summits held in the wake of the White House summit in February and in
the leadup to the Senior Leader summit to be held in New York around
the U.N. General Assembly.
This summit builds on a foundation of existing engagements aimed at
building cooperation in the East Africa region, such as the Global
Counter Terrorism--Horn of Africa Working Group and the Partnership for
Regional Counterterrorism in East Africa. The participants for the
Kenya CVE summit will represent a broad spectrum of government and
civil society from throughout the region. The objective is to enhance
further regional cooperation and coordination, as well as develop a
joint understanding of how violent extremists gain and sustain support
among some local populations. By sharing knowledge and best practices,
the conference will help strengthen the response to violent extremism
in the East Africa region and beyond. USAID is a key member of the U.S.
delegation to the Kenya summit and will participate in all the other
planned regional summits.
The White House CVE summit and the regional summits have
highlighted the value of USAID's approach to addressing violent
extremism as part of a whole-of-government response to terrorist
threats in Africa and worldwide. In 2011, USAID released an agency-
level policy, the Development Response to Violent Extremism and
Insurgency, that outlines best practices from several years of CVE
programming, as well as from research on the factors that drive violent
extremist recruitment and how development assistance can help mitigate
these root causes. A critical aspect of effective CVE programming is
building community resilience, which is particularly key in areas at
recurring risk of exploitation by violent extremist groups. At its
core, USAID's approach is based on understanding the legitimate
concerns of minority populations in areas most at risk to violent
extremism; working with local community organizations and government
officials to address those concerns; building respect for human rights
and the rule of law among all parties; and promoting respected,
moderate voices who can encourage peaceful solutions to expressed
grievances. I understand that based on evaluations of USAID programs in
Chad, Niger, Mali, and Kenya, these programs have made a measurable
impact among local populations by undermining support for violent
extremist rhetoric and activities.
It is my belief that the United States needs a broad array of tools
in its toolkit to counter terrorism effectively. USAID's programs
attempt to address problems at their source by decreasing the momentum
and rationale behind violent extremist recruitment while reducing local
sympathies and support for extremists. These efforts complement our
Nation's ongoing diplomatic, defense, and intelligence assets aimed at
reducing the terrorist threat to ourselves and our partners.
The Europe and Eurasia Bureau
Question. With the rise of a belligerent Russia, the E&E Bureau has
taken on new prominence and significant budget responsibilities
especially with respect to Ukraine, yet the E&E Bureau does not have
offices in the main headquarters building. This sends a bad message and
hampers the Bureau's ability to coordinate with the rest of USAID.
What can be done to address this issue?
Would you consider at least moving the leadership of the
E&E Bureau into the main USAID building?
Answer. I have not been involved in any decisions related to space
within USAID's headquarters. If confirmed, I look forward to receiving
a briefing from the relevant personnel on the Agency's plans with
respect to the allocation of space and will ensure that our plans are
consistent with Agency priorities and staffing requirements.
MENA
Question. In 2011 the Arab Spring protests and calls for nonviolent
reform offered tremendous hope for the potential of the Middle East
region. Four years later we face a long, cold winter with many states
reverting to old bad habits of closing off all avenues for nonviolent
political expression or economic opportunity. Worse yet, we are facing
failed or close to failing states in Yemen, Libya, and Syria. In the
face of such unpredictability, instability, and violence the U.S.
diplomatic presence and USAID field offices have been forced to draw
down or close. In other areas, governments are actively confronting
USAID funded programs and projects.
How are you thinking about U.S. assistance and development
engagement in the Middle East and North Africa against this
depressing and alarming backdrop?
Do we need to change the way we do business, or the
missions we pursue, in the region?
Answer. USAID works with local and international partners to
address the tremendous needs in the Middle East and North Africa. USAID
recognizes that capable and accountable governance institutions are
crucial to the sustainability of our development investments, which is
why the Agency seeks to integrate democracy, human rights and
governance principles and practices across all programming.
USAID's approach in the Middle East is twofold; the Agency works
not only with governments, but also at a grassroots level, changing the
lives of individuals and transforming communities. USAID works closely
with national governments where that is possible, and where national-
level governance institutions are lacking, USAID works at the local
level, with municipal councils or local civil society, to help meet the
immediate needs of the people in the region as well as build
sustainable local governance structures that can support a move to
resilient democratic societies. Local- and municipal-level governance
issues are an increasingly important component to USAID's work in the
region, especially in communities affected by conflict and crisis. Key
elements in all USAID programs are a deep analysis of the political
context, supporting citizen engagement in policymaking and service
delivery, and promoting the rights of all citizens and groups to ensure
equitable development gains. USAID programs represent a long-term
investment in the people and communities of the Middle East and North
Africa and build on the Agency's mission to partner to end extreme
poverty and promote resilient, democratic societies while advancing our
own security and prosperity.
USAID is constantly reassessing the way it does business and the
specific programs in which it invests. Each country and regional
program begins with a careful assessment of local needs and capacity
for reform. Once programs are implemented they are carefully monitored
and evaluated for effectiveness and lessons learned. Security concerns
remain a significant challenge, and the security of USAID staff and
implementing partners is paramount. In places where USAID has no
direct-hire staff on the ground, the Agency uses local and
international partners as well as remote management techniques to
continue and ensure close oversight of USAID programs.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with Agency personnel, the
Congress, and our implementing partners to ensure our programming is
achieving maximum impact and effectiveness.
Humanitarian response (Syria)
Question. In addition to the recently closed $10 million USAID/
DCHA/OFDA Annual Program Statement to support local capacity-building
and emergency response efforts in Syria, in what other ways can USAID
best support long-term efforts to more effectively reach the over 12.2
million IDP's inside Syria that are in need of humanitarian assistance?
Answer. USAID continues to work through all channels--including the
United Nations (U.N.), international organizations, nongovernmental
organizations (NGOs), and local Syrian organizations and networks--to
maximize the reach of critical, lifesaving assistance to conflict-
affected populations throughout Syria. This includes assistance that
originates in Syria as well as cross-line and cross-border assistance.
By using all means possible to get lifesaving assistance to those in
need throughout the country--including in regime, contested, and
opposition--held areas--USAID is reaching all 14 governorates of Syria.
The aministration's ultimate humanitarian priority is to provide
lifesaving assistance to all that we are able to reach and continue to
push for consistent, safe, and secure access for humanitarian aid
workers. As part of ongoing efforts to address the increase in
humanitarian needs in an extremely fluid conflict, USAID continues to
identify and support opportunities to strengthen and maximize the reach
of humanitarian assistance throughout Syria. As part of all
humanitarian programs, including USAID's Office of U.S. Foreign
Disaster Assistance (OFDA) Annual Program Statement, USAID partners
provide technical assistance to local organizations to strengthen their
ability to meet the needs of affected populations. USAID works with
other donors and implementing partners to identify opportunities to
transition from emergency response to longer term early recovery and
development programs. The Agency's humanitarian experts coordinate
closely with development counterparts to help ensure that, when
humanitarian assistance programs end, basic social services can be
maintained.
The needs in Syria are significant and USAID has had to balance
these needs with those of other crises around the world, prioritizing
the most immediate lifesaving assistance first. I understand that USAID
is working closely with the State Department as well as other
international donors to encourage countries to follow through on
pledges made at the Kuwait conference, especially Gulf States.
Egypt
Question. President Sisi has made economic stabilization a priority
for his administration and has committed to creating employment through
megaprojects like the expansion of the Suez Canal. U.S. assistance has
focused supporting education, entrepreneurs, and small and medium-sized
enterprises, most notably through the Higher Education Initiative and
the Egyptian American Enterprise Fund.
In what ways do U.S. assistance and Egyptian economic
development initiatives complement each other?
Answer. U.S. economic assistance to Egypt is designed to work
across all sectors to support and strengthen Egyptian actors who
advance democratic ideals. Improved employment and economic opportunity
are cornerstones of stability in Egypt. Poverty and economic exclusion,
when unaddressed, inhibit the ability of individuals to invest in their
own future and make them vulnerable to forces of instability as they
struggle to provide for their daily needs.
I understand that USAID supported Egypt's Ministry of Planning in
developing the country's Sustainable Development Strategy, released in
March 2015. The strategy has four principal goals: (1) improved
economy, including macroeconomic, tax, and subsidy reforms to reduce
the deficit and lower inflation; (2) improved business enabling
environment through regulatory and institutional reforms; (3) better
access for all Egyptians to services and employment opportunities; and
(4) increased investment in human capital, specifically reforming
education and health systems. The strategy also emphasizes improving
social safety nets and promoting opportunity for women and youth.
USAID is positioned to support the Government of Egypt's vision
outlined in its Sustainable Development Strategy. USAID programs in
economic growth, education, health, and democracy and governance are
designed to address the core development issues identified in the
Government of Egypt's strategy. USAID supports major themes of the
strategy, including macroeconomic policy reform, small and medium
enterprise development, vocational and technical education, and social
justice and inclusion.
For example, building skills in Egypt's private sector workforce,
particularly in small business, tourism, and agriculture, is a key
component of USAID's development approach. USAID also recognizes the
need to work within the health care system to provide better care in
rural community clinics and promote infection control programs in
hospitals.USAID's technical and vocational school interventions and
programs that support science, technology, engineering, and mathematics
education promote private sector growth and enterprise development.
Many of USAID's activities target underserved areas, mainly in rural
Egypt. All of these interventions are supportive of the Government of
Egypt's Sustainable Development Strategy.
How can U.S. assistance help to promote political reform,
in addition to economic reform?
Answer. Consistent with U.S. foreign policy objectives, assistance
activities in Egypt are designed to promote both political and economic
reform. U.S. assistance focuses on various aspects of the enabling
environment needed both for inclusive economic growth and improved
governance. Support also assists in making public institutions more
accountable and effective, and in empowering Egypt's citizens.
If confirmed as Administrator, I will ensure USAID's continued
commitment to promoting essential democracy and governance principles
in Egypt. While advancing certain democracy, rights and governance
issues is a challenge in the current environment, the Agency is moving
forward with support to civil society organizations to combat gender-
based violence, promote women's empowerment, counter trafficking in
persons, promote religious tolerance, and support rights of people with
disabilities. Many international and Egyptian civil society
organizations remain committed to working with USAID. The Agency also
works to empower Egyptian civil society actors across its assistance
programs, including in education, economic development and health.
The Egyptian Government has also specifically requested USAID
assistance in key areas such as election administration reforms,
training Egyptian judges, and decentralizing Egypt's Government in line
with provisions of Egypt's new Constitution. USAID also has mechanisms
in place to support parliamentary strengthening once a new Parliament
is elected.
Question. There is solid evidence that early malnutrition,
especially during the 1,000 day window from pregnancy to age 2, is an
obstacle to cognitive and physical development. It affects long-term
health, learning and earning potential. Malnutrition, in other words,
is a constraint to economic growth.
Malnutrition is also the underlying cause of half of all deaths of
children before they reach their 5th birthday. Having the benefit of
the recently launched USAID Multi-Sectoral Nutrition Strategy and the
soon-to-be launched U.S. Whole of Government Nutrition Coordination
Plan, how would you build upon global momentum on maternal and child
nutrition to achieve and increase U.S. nutrition commitments and high
impact interventions that help children to survive and thrive?
Answer. USAID's multidisciplinary approach to addressing
malnutrition works across the Agency's programs, including the U.S.
Government's Feed the Future and Global Health activities, the Office
of Food for Peace development programs, resilience efforts, and
nutrition investments through economic growth, water and sanitation,
and other sectors. USAID's focus is primarily on the prevention of
undernutrition during the first 1,000 days--from pregnancy through a
child's second birthday--through comprehensive programs in health,
humanitarian assistance, and food security. Last year, the Agency's
efforts reached over 12.5 million children under 5 with nutrition
interventions. Over the past 18 months, USAID has led the development
of a consolidated U.S. Government Nutrition Coordination Plan to
harness the power of the diverse investments across the U.S. Government
through better communication and collaboration, and to create stronger
links between research and program implementation. This plan is
expected to be launched this fall.
The Agency's high level goal to End Preventable Child and Maternal
Deaths has nutrition at its core with renewed investments to promote
breastfeeding, improve maternal nutrition for mothers' health and for
the healthy growth and development of babies, and for better feeding
practices for infants and young children. Better nutrition includes
clean water, better hygiene and sanitation to prevent the vicious cycle
of infection and chronic undernutrition.
Multisectoral attention in nutrition interventions is producing
positive results. In Bangladesh, 2014 survey results show an almost 15
percent average reduction in stunting during the past 3 years across
priority geographical areas where Feed the Future programs are
concentrated. In Ethiopia, through Feed the Future and Food for Peace
development and emergency programs, USAID is supporting progress toward
achieving real reductions in stunting, with rates declining by 9
percent over the past 3 years, resulting in 160,000 fewer stunted
children despite a growing population.
If confirmed, I will continue to scale up USAID's successful
multisectoral programs and exercise strong leadership, including
through its critical role in the global Scaling Up Nutrition--or SUN--
Movement, to leverage the combined efforts and commitments of multiple
donors and countries to drastically reduce chronic malnutrition
globally. SUN is a global movement comprised of 55 country governments,
civil society, private sector, and donors and provides a global
spotlight on the challenges and progress in eliminating undernutrition.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator boxer
Question. Supporting Women Globally.--This year marked the 20th
anniversary of the 4th World Conference on Women. Over the past 20
years, the international community has made important progress on
advancing the rights of women worldwide. However, as long as women and
girls around the globe continue to face violence and discrimination and
are denied the opportunity to exercise their most basic rights, the
United States must continue to focus on women and girls as a
cornerstone of its foreign policy and development.
How do you see the role of women and girls in development?
If confirmed, how will you work to ensure that USAID
programs continue to advance women's equality, health,
political participation, and rights globally?
Answer. Throughout my career, I have been dedicated to initiatives
that empower women and girls. Gender equality and women's empowerment
must be at the core of all of our development programs. Water, energy,
agriculture, health, and education all affect men and women
differently. These differences are not barriers but opportunities to
maximize the impact of our work by delivering development in a more
targeted, effective and sustainable way.
Over the past several years, the Agency has made important strides
to elevate women and girls in its approach and programming. The U.S.
National Action Plan (NAP) on Women, Peace, and Security (2011) and the
subsequent USAID Implementation Plan are an integral part of the
Agency's architecture for advancing gender equality and female
empowerment. In 2012, USAID released the Gender Equality and Women's
Empowerment Policy, which mandates that gender equality be integrated
throughout all programs and initiatives. To help facilitate
integration, USAID developed accompanying policy implementation
guidance, a series of in-person and online gender training courses to
build staff capacity, and a suite of technical resources and tools that
have been disseminated to staff worldwide.
Now that the foundation has been established, the remaining
challenge is to ensure that gender is truly integrated across all of
the sectors in which the Agency works, including global initiatives
such as eradicating extreme poverty, resilience, countering violent
extremism, and responding to climate change. Doing so will require a
deeper understanding of the challenges in each sector through in-depth
gender analysis and impact measurement as well as the necessary
resources to advance the solutions.
USAID has a major role in the White House's new Let Girls Learn
initiative, which addresses the complex and varied barriers preventing
adolescent girls from attending and completing school, and from
realizing their potential as adults. USAID's Let Girls Learn approach
is comprised of three main pillars: Increasing Access to Quality
Education; Reducing Barriers such as school fees and the threat of
violence; and Empowering Adolescent Girls.
If confirmed, I will work with Congress and with the talented men
and women of USAID to build on this important progress.
Question. Improving Education for Adolescent Girls.--Globally, 62
million girls are not in school and approximately 17 million will never
go to school. Of these girls, 35 million are adolescents who should be
in or nearing secondary school. Statistics show that increased levels
of girls' education support improved health, economic status, and
political participation.
In 2013, I introduced legislation, named for Malala Yousafzai,
which was designed to expand scholarship opportunities for
disadvantaged young women in Pakistan through USAID's Merit and Needs
Based Scholarship Program. In response to this legislation, I was
pleased that USAID committed to provide 50 percent of all future
program scholarships to women and is on track to meet that goal in
calendar year 2015.
If confirmed, how will you work to continue to expand
educational opportunities for women and girls in Pakistan?
Answer. Pakistan's ability to educate its population is critical to
the country's long-term stability and prosperity. I understand that,
despite recent measures taken to expand Government of Pakistan spending
and performance in this sector, Pakistan's challenges remain daunting.
School-aged girls, specifically, face additional challenges; 55 percent
of children out of school are girls. For those who do attend school,
many are not learning what is needed to find employment and function in
Pakistan's economy.
In line with Pakistan's Vision 2025, U.S. assistance helps Pakistan
address obstacles to accessing quality basic and higher education,
including for women and girls. Programming also provides ample
opportunity to build collaborative relationships between U.S. and
Pakistani individuals and institutions, which will have a long-term
impact on Pakistan's trajectory and U.S.-Pakistan cooperation. If
confirmed, I will ensure USAID's basic and higher education programs
will continue to work to improve access to education for young
Pakistanis, including women and girls. For example, I understand that
in basic education, the Pakistan Reading Project (PRP) is USAID/
Pakistan's flagship reading program, and will continue to support
Pakistani-led efforts to introduce and institutionalize improvements in
reading instruction and reading assessment in the first and second
grade levels in public schools across Pakistan. The project will train
more qualified female teachers for girls' and mixed gender primary
schools, and will reach approximately 754,000 students, of which half
are girls and, of the girls, 27 percent are adolescents.
In Sindh, I understand that USAID's Sindh Basic Education Project
will continue to strengthen the capacity of the Government of Sindh to
deliver quality education and empower communities to become more
involved in their children's education. To improve educational outcomes
and increase community involvement in education, the project will help
construct schools, train teachers in early grade reading and
mathematics instruction and provide basic reading and math skills to
students. The program is projected to benefit over 82,000 adolescent
girls.
In higher education, I understand USAID has seen an increase from
48 percent to 58 percent of university scholarships under USAID/
Pakistan's Merit and Needs-Based Scholarship Program awarded to women.
To date, 507 scholarships have been awarded to students; of these, 293
were given to female students. Pakistan also remains the largest
Fulbright Scholars program country in the world, with half of all
scholarships going to women.
Will you commit to make girls' education--especially
adolescent girls' education--a priority during your tenure at
USAID?
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID will remain strongly
committed to ensuring that girls succeed and stay in school. Advancing
girls' education can unlock human potential on a transformational
scale. Girls' education is key in the global effort to end extreme
poverty. Investing in girls' education could boost agricultural output
in sub-Saharan Africa by 25 percent, and if 10 percent more girls
attend school, a country's GDP increases by an average of 3 percent.
Advancing girls' access to, and success in, education is integrated
throughout the Agency's education portfolio. By integrating gender
considerations across all USAID's education programs, the Agency has
the potential to transform gender norms and achieve equality for all
learners in a scalable and sustainable manner. USAID provides
substantial support and funding aimed at ensuring that girls and
adolescent females have increased equitable access to quality
education, particularly in crisis and conflict-affected environments.
Specifically in education, I understand that promoting gender equality
remains a top priority in each of the three Education Strategy goal
areas: increasing primary grade reading; youth and workforce
development; and education in crisis- and conflict-affected areas.
One of the first USAID programs announced under Let Girls Learn is
the one the First Lady announced during her trip last week in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo, where USAID has partnered with the
United Kingdom's Department for International Development (DFID) to
provide girls who are not in school with access to accelerated and
alternative learning programs in the conflict-affected areas of North
Kivu, South Kivu, and Katanga. This program aims to benefit more than
755,000 girls ages 10 to 18 over the next 5 years, providing up to $180
million (up to $125 million by USAID and 36M committed by
DFID). Through programs like this, and throughout the Agency's
portfolio, USAID supports adolescent girls in getting the education
they deserve.
Question. U.S. Efforts to Support International Family Planning.--
Statistics clearly show that a woman's ability to decide when, whether,
and how many children to have is fundamental to her ability to thrive
and fully realize her rights and potential.
How do you see access to voluntary family planning services
as part of broader efforts to support women's health and
rights?
Answer. Access to voluntary, affordable, and high-quality family
planning services is an essential part of USAID's broader effort to
support women's health and rights. When women are able to delay their
first birth until at least age 18 and to space subsequent births at
least 2 years apart, both mother and baby are more likely to survive.
Some 225 million women in the developing world say they want to delay
their next pregnancy or stop childbearing altogether but are not using
a modern method of contraception. Fully meeting this unmet need by
expanding access to, and use of, voluntary family planning would result
in 52 million fewer unintended pregnancies, 70,000 fewer maternal
deaths, and 500,000 fewer infant deaths annually. In addition, girls
who can avoid pregnancy while in school are more likely to finish
school.
Question. U.S. Efforts to End Preventable Maternal and Child
Deaths.--In your testimony, you mentioned that continuing efforts to
end preventable child and maternal deaths would be a priority for you
if you are confirmed to be the Administrator of USAID.
It is more important than ever that the United States continue to
make robust investments in maternal and child health. As a result of
U.S. leadership, real and measurable progress has been made. In the 24
countries where U.S. involvement has been the greatest, maternal
mortality has declined an average of 4 percent each year, faster than
the global average.
With this progress in mind, if confirmed, how will you work
to continue and expand these effective investments to work
toward achieving the global goal of ending preventable maternal
and child deaths by the year 2035?
Answer. Since 2009, the Obama administration has been strategically
focusing its maternal and child health programs on countries with the
highest burdens of maternal, newborn, and child deaths and where the
United States had the opportunity to make a difference in this outcome.
By focusing on countries and populations with the highest need, U.S.
programs have helped save millions of lives, contributing to greater
equity and more inclusive development. In USAID's 24 priority countries
that account for more than 70 percent of global child and maternal
deaths, nearly 800,000 more children survived in 2013 than in 2008,
contributing to a cumulative total 2.4 million lives saved.
USAID's 2014 report ``Acting on the Call: Ending Preventable Child
and Maternal Deaths'' outlined an evidence-based plan to accelerate
progress in USAID priority countries--sharpening field programs,
realizing efficiencies, and improving accountability to yield the
greatest number of lives saved, while building systems and partnerships
to sustain progress. Building on this momentum, USAID appointed a Child
and Maternal Survival Coordinator in 2015, focused on: (1) continuing
to sharpen the Agency's work toward Ending Preventable Child and
Maternal Deaths; (2) intensifying external engagement with Congress and
partners, advocates, civil society, faith groups, and partner country
leaders that are critical to progress; and (3) increasing financing for
EPCMD. USAID is working to accelerate its action through a new
framework to track success, support missions, and ensure that resources
are in place to sustain the effort. By enhancing existing internal
processes such as the annual operational plan development, USAID can
improve its performance and ensure that our investments are focusing on
the highest priorities. Dashboards have been developed to rigorously
measure progress at both the outcome level and input level. The
dashboards facilitate a more organized, coordinated system for
tracking, and managing progress, and are a supporting tool in a
comprehensive approach to measuring progress.
I understand USAID is working to release the second ``Acting on the
Call'' report in summer 2015, following up on commitments and targets
set in the 2014 report. Through dashboards and these annual reports,
USAID is holding itself and its partners accountable for accelerating
our impact on ending preventable child and maternal deaths.
Ending Preventable Child and Maternal Deaths cannot be accomplished
by USAID alone. In 2012, the Governments of Ethiopia, India, and the
United States, in collaboration with UNICEF, hosted the Call to Action
to unite the global community around this achievable goal. The same
partners convened again in 2014 to assess progress and identify
challenges. This year, the Government of India will host a followup
global conference in August, cohosted by the Governments of Ethiopia
and the United States, and UNICEF. Since 2012, 20 governments have
committed to--and most have developed--national plans to accelerate
progress, set clear priorities and costs and scorecards to
systematically track outcomes.
Since the beginning of the Obama administration, the U.S.
Government has increased investments in global child and maternal
survival with the strong, bipartisan support of Congress. Worldwide,
government health expenditures and donor contributions have seen
meaningful growth. There still remains a gap in financing needed to
build on progress to date and bridging that gap will require strategies
that incorporate domestic resource mobilization, global engagement,
USAID's Health Financing Framework, and targeted country-specific
interventions. As countries experience unprecedented economic growth, a
new transitional model of aid can better mobilize domestic public,
private, and other innovative sources of funding to create a bridge
toward equity, sustainability, and self-sufficiency. If confirmed, I am
committed to building on the successes of USAID's efforts to end
preventable maternal and child deaths.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator rubio
On democracy, rights, and governance
Question. What guarantees can you give the committee that you will
consult the democracy, rights, and governance (DRG) community on
USAID's strategic objectives and program implementation? Are you
willing to provide the committee with periodic reports on your
consultations with the DRG community?
Answer. The community of implementing organizations--including
grantees, contractors, universities, private sector organizations,
labor, human rights and women's rights advocacy groups and other
organizations--is essential to accomplishing USAID's mission to promote
prosperous, resilient democratic societies. I believe that consultation
with international and local partners is fundamental to the successful
implementation of the Agency's programs. In developing strategies,
programs, and implementing strategies, USAID policy calls for
consultation with stakeholders and if confirmed, I will strongly
support these efforts and will commit the Agency to providing periodic
reports to the committee on our consultations with the democracy,
rights and governance community.
Question. The United States has developed a strong nonprofit sector
to implement, through cooperative agreements, programs in support of
those seeking freedom and genuinely participatory governance. How will
you ensure that funding for DRG programming will be maintained through
the cooperative agreement mechanism?
Answer. I understand that cooperative agreements, as one form of
assistance, are widely used and represent a successful approach for
accomplishing objectives across many development sectors, particularly
in the Democracy, Rights and Governance (DRG) sector. I further
understand that contracts also have an appropriate role to play in
implementing DRG assistance. My understanding is that the Agency is
currently working to develop supplemental guidance for the DRG sector
to assist field officers in determining the choice of mechanism in
light of what they are trying to achieve and what in their judgment
will produce success in that country setting. If confirmed, I look
forward to consulting with Congress and our implementing partners to
ensure we are getting this mix right.
Question. USAID has attempted to ``mainstream'' democracy and
governance by claiming to incorporate it into traditional development
programs (e.g., health, education, environment), yet the record is
mixed on whether that actually works. What are your intentions to work
with the DRG community on the incorporation of participatory mechanisms
in traditional development programming?
Answer. ``Mainstreaming'' or what the Agency has defined as
``Democracy, Rights and Governance (DRG) integration'' involves the use
of DRG approaches across other development sectors. This initiative is
based on the understanding that technical solutions alone may be
ineffective or unsustainable without a strong foundation based on good
governance and effective, transparent, and accountable institutions.
Indeed, the Agency's programs in health, food security, climate change,
economic growth all need to have components of citizen participation
and government accountability to be successful.
If confirmed, I am committed to consulting partners in the DRG
community on an ongoing basis to maximize the effectiveness and impact
of our programs and ensure that democratic principles underpin all of
our work.
Question. Specifically in the case of closed societies or countries
where space for political activity and civil society is closing, what
is your vision for USAID's role in providing support in those
instances? What specific steps would you implement to achieve your
vision?
Answer. I believe that USAID has a critical role to play in
supporting reform within closed societies. In doing so, however, the
Agency must maintain an appropriate balance between the transparency of
USAID's programming on the one hand and the security of our
implementing partners and program beneficiaries on the other hand. It
is my understanding that over the past year, and in consultation with
Congress and implementing partners, USAID has formulated and begun to
implement a new policy in this area, which is available on its public
Web site. The new guidance sets out core principles and detailed
processes to govern the Agency's work in this small set of countries.
For example, USAID will work with prospective partners to identify all
possible sources of risk to a proposed program. And the Agency will
undertake senior-level quarterly reviews to ensure that all of our
programs in these countries are sufficiently addressing risk and
sufficiently fulfilling our obligation to transparency.
I think this represents a sensible approach, and if confirmed, look
forward to working with the Agency, Congress, and our implementing
partners to provide careful stewardship of these critical programs.
On Central America
Question. The State Department is asking for $1billion dollars for
1 year to improve security, advance good governance and stimulate the
economy of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras which are collectively
known as the Northern Triangle Countries.
What programs does USAID currently have in Central America?
Answer. Much of USAID's assistance in recent years has focused on
crime and violence prevention through the Central America Regional
Security Initiative (CARSI). Results from a Vanderbilt University
impact evaluation of USAID's CARSI community-based interventions in
Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, and Panama show that USAID's programs
are reducing crime victimization and residents' sense of insecurity.
For example, in communities with USAID interventions, compared to
control communities with no USAID intervention, there was a 51-percent
decrease in residents' awareness of murders in their own neighborhoods,
51-percent decrease in residents' reports of extortions, 25-percent
decrease in residents' reports of illegal drug sales, and 19-percent
decrease in residents' reports of robberies.
USAID's governance programs focus on strengthening institutions at
the national and subnational levels and improving citizens' and civil
society's public participation. USAID has supported efforts to improve
delivery of basic services, to incorporate citizen participation into
public policy, to increase citizens' access to justice, to decrease
impunity, and to improve governments' capacity to generate and collect
their own revenue. For example, USAID/El Salvador's tax administration
and expenditure management programs set up automated audits, one-stop
shops for taxpayers, improved enforcement of tax policies, which have
resulted in a 30-percent overall increase in revenue collections from
2010-2013. In terms of revenue collected as a percentage of GDP, USAID
has helped El Salvador achieve an increase from 13.5 percent in 2010 to
15.5 percent in 2014.
Current USAID economic growth programming in Central America is
limited in scope. In Guatemala and Honduras, USAID's Feed the Future
programs promote food security, increase incomes, and enhance nutrition
by improving production of staple and higher value crops, linking
producers to markets, and supporting targeted nutrition interventions.
In Honduras, over 3 years, USAID has helped to double incomes (from
$0.62/day to $1.21/day) of over 22,000 farming families or 125,000
people in one of the poorest regions. Programs in El Salvador support
the Partnership for Growth Joint Country Action Plan and include
improvements to the business enabling environment, support to small and
medium enterprises (SMEs), and efforts to boost market relevant skills
in the labor force. In El Salvador, over 3 years, USAID has helped SMEs
generate over $57 million in new sales and exports. Central America
Regional programs are helping to reduce the time and cost to trade
goods across borders. The Central America Strategy envisions greater
investments in areas such as promoting regional integration, improving
the business climate, supporting SME development, creating a productive
workforce, and reducing poverty.
The Strategy for U.S. Engagement in Central America broadens
USAID's vision for how it achieves security. USAID will balance its
previous and ongoing citizen security-focused investments with
proportional investments in prosperity and governance. USAID has
prioritized three interconnected objectives: prosperity, governance,
and security. A secure, democratic, and prosperous Central America will
provide an environment in which all of its citizens choose to remain
and thrive.
Question. Considering the history of corruption in some Central
American countries, how does the administration plan to account for the
$1 billion dollars?
Answer. My understanding is that all foreign assistance programs
administered by USAID are required to have oversight processes in place
to ensure the effectiveness of activities, to monitor funds spent by
our partners, and to ensure compliance with federal regulations. USAID
regularly evaluate its activities. Nearly all of its current resources
are programmed through nongovernmental organizations and development
companies, which are audited on a regular basis.
Going forward, I understand the Department of State and USAID
intend to calibrate assistance in response to real reform efforts to
send a clear message at the outset that resources will follow reform,
and that they will reward the countries that are the most serious about
reform. In my view, USAID programming cannot succeed without the right
policy environment. Funding flexibility will enable the Department and
USAID to support programs with the greatest potential and to ensure
senior U.S. Government officials can press partner governments on the
needs to make tough reforms.
USAID is developing a results framework for the U.S. Strategy for
Engagement in Central America that identifies the key goals the
strategy will advance. The framework will assess progress on three
levels: programmatic, political will, and national level trajectory.
USAID will prepare regular reports for U.S. Government principals to
inform ongoing policy discussions.
Programmatic: The Department and USAID use both formal and informal
methods to continuously monitor and evaluate the performance of its
programs. A program tracker will allow USAID to determine what works
and where its programs face obstacles. If necessary, principals will be
able to intervene in order to accelerate or adjust implementation and
to remove obstacles.
Political Will: While the United States is investing significant
resources, success in Central America is first and foremost dependent
on the Central American governments themselves taking ownership for
creating the conditions for positive change in their countries. U.S.
engagement and the possibility of a new U.S. approach to assistance has
already leveraged greater efforts by Central American nations, and they
are solidifying their 2016 budget plans to include significant
financial contributions to programs. Initial political will indicators
are derived from the March 3, 2015, Joint Statement between the Vice
President and the Presidents of El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras as
well as from the ``Alliance for Prosperity.'' This category will
reflect an ongoing conversation with senior U.S. officials and leaders
from the region; new indicators will be added based on these
conversations.
National Level Trajectory: I believe it is important to bear in
mind the desired outcome of a deepened and sustained U.S. engagement in
Central America. While national-level indicators will not likely change
on a quarterly basis--and may not change year to year--USAID is
ultimately seeking to advance the most important indicators such as GDP
growth, poverty rates, homicide rates, and perceptions of corruption
throughout the region.
USAID measures good governance in a number of ways, and over the
long term will rely on indicators from respected organizations such as
Transparency International, Freedom House and the World Bank. Citizens'
trust in state institutions, increased collection and effective and
transparent use of public revenue, and actions by the government that
hold officials accountable are all indicative of the strength of
government institutions.
USAID's prosperity interventions will be measured by such
illustrative indicators as income levels and the ability of citizens to
participate in the formal economy.
On Haiti
Question. The planned funding by USAID for Haiti in fiscal year
2015 is $274 million. According to foreignassistance.gov, approximately
$64 million has been obligated in the first 9 months of the year.
Why has less than a quarter of the aid budgeted been spent
when many Haitians continue to sit in emergency camps and
desperately need our help?
Answer. As with all of our assistance programs, I believe it is
critical that we strike the right balance between ensuring that our
interventions are carried out in a timely manner while also performing
appropriate due diligence, oversight and planning. I understand that as
of March 31, 2015, USAID had approximately $1.8 billion available for
long-term reconstruction and development in Haiti, of which $1.5 had
been obligated; with disbursements totaling $1.3 billion or 72 percent
of overall funds provided. In addition, I am told that 100 percent of
the $1.2 billion provided for humanitarian assistance has been
disbursed.
Regarding internally displaced persons, it is important to note
that, as of March 2015, nearly 94 percent of the 1.5 million internally
displaced people have left temporary camps for alternative housing
options. USAID, for its part, provided shelter solutions to more than
328,000 people through transitional shelters (t-shelters), repairs to
damaged houses, financial support to host families who housed displaced
people, and provided short-term rental vouchers to affected families.
USAID's long-term strategy for the shelter sector is to support cost-
effective ways to increase durable housing stock through private sector
engagement and urban planning. This includes providing low-income
households with access to housing finance and better infrastructure,
and working in existing neighborhoods, and the Government of Haiti to
expand access to basic services.
Question. As Haitian nationals are being repatriated by the
Dominican Republic, is the aid currently being sent sufficient to help
Haiti resettle these nationals? Or will additional funds be requested?
Answer. The administration continues to press for a diplomatic
solution to the repatriation issue that will mitigate the need for a
humanitarian response related to repatriated persons.
I understand that USAID is closely monitoring this situation but is
not at the point of requesting additional funding.
Palestinian steps at the United Nations and the ICC
Question. On April 1, 2015, the Palestinians formally became a
member of the International Criminal Court (ICC). Under current U.S.
law, the administration is required to cut off Palestinian aid if the
Palestinians pursue or support charges against Israel in a judicially
authorized ICC case at the ICC.
The Palestinian Authority has also taken a series of detrimental
steps at the United Nations over the past year, including an effort
last year to push for a one-sided United Nations Security Council
(UNSC) resolution that called for a final agreement within 12 months
requiring total Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines by 2017,
regardless of Israeli security concerns.
If confirmed, will you continue to oppose the ICC's
politicization of these issues, as is current U.S. policy?
What impact do you think President Mahmoud Abbas's move
should have on current U.S. aid to the Palestinians and
America's willingness to provide future assistance?
What role is USAID currently playing in Gaza and what do
you believe is the appropriate role for USAID going forward?
There are troubling reports that some of the money that has
made it into Gaza for reconstruction has been diverted for
continued construction of Hamas terrorist tunnels. Is this
true? If confirmed, what mechanisms will you put in place to
ensure U.S. aid reaches its intended recipients?
What steps will USAID take to employ proper auditing
requirements on aid to the Palestinians? Will you ensure proper
strict procedures are in place to ensure U.S. aid reaches its
intended targets and is not abused to support Hamas or other
Palestinian entities that support violence?
Answer. I understand that USAID, in conjunction with the State
Department, continues to review U.S. assistance to the Palestinians.
Although the administration's view is that the legislative restrictions
related to Palestinian initiation or active support for an ICC
judicially authorized investigation have not been triggered to date, we
are deeply troubled by Palestinian action at the ICC and continue to
voice our opposition to further actions to both the Palestinians and
the international community.
The administration continues to believe that U.S. assistance to the
Palestinian people is an important tool in promoting regional
stability, economic development, and increased security for both
Palestinians and Israelis.
Since the onset of the July-August 2014 conflict in Gaza, the
United States has committed more than $231 million in humanitarian
assistance to Gaza. This assistance has been provided to established
U.N. and nongovernmental organizations, including the United Nations
Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East
(UNRWA), the World Food Program, the United Nations Development
Program, UNICEF, the International Committee for the Red Cross, and
others. My understanding is that USAID is not currently aware of any
reports that U.S. assistance for humanitarian aid in Gaza, including
reconstruction, has been diverted for other purposes. The United States
takes very seriously any reports of diversion of its assistance, and
USAID has long required its partners in Gaza to take appropriate steps
to prevent U.S. funding from being diverted for nonintended purposes.
Consistent with statutory requirements, USAID has appropriate
procedures in place to ensure that Economic Support Fund (ESF)
assistance for the West Bank and Gaza is not provided to or through, or
diverted to, any individual or entity that is known to be involved in
or advocating terrorism, including Hamas. USAID's vetting process
checks non-U.S. individuals and entities within certain thresholds
against law enforcement and intelligence community systems prior to
local prime or subaward issuance. Worldwide, USAID requires grantees to
sign its Certification Regarding Terrorist Financing in order to
receive funds. In the West Bank and Gaza specifically, the annual
Appropriations Act requires annual audits of all USAID direct awardees,
as well as an annual Government Accountability Office audit of the use
of all ESF assistance. USAID will continue providing humanitarian and
other assistance to Palestinians in Gaza, in line with the
administration's national security objectives, and in compliance with
U.S. law.
I am committed to strong oversight of and accountability for the
administration of foreign assistance funds entrusted to the Agency and
preventing waste, fraud, or abuse, and if confirmed, this will be a top
priority.
Egypt
Question. What is the current status of U.S. economic aid to Egypt?
How can our aid to Egypt be better targeted to strengthen Egyptian
actors that support democratic ideals? How will economic assistance to
Egypt be used? Do you support current conditions on U.S. aid to Egypt,
including the maintenance of the Egypt-Israel peace treaty?
Answer. U.S. economic aid to Egypt is designed to work across all
sectors to support and strengthen Egyptian actors who advance
democratic ideals. Poverty and economic exclusion, when unaddressed,
inhibit the ability of individuals to invest in their own future and
make them vulnerable to forces of instability as they struggle to
provide for their daily needs.
Economic assistance to Egypt aims to help foster rapid, inclusive,
and sustainable economic growth. USAID's economic growth programs focus
on supporting sound macroeconomic management, improving the climate for
private sector businesses, developing small and medium enterprises to
create jobs, and promoting bilateral trade. Assistance in the education
sector will strengthen basic skills in elementary school and adult
literacy to increase the employability of young Egyptians. The U.S.-
Egypt Higher Education Initiative provides scholarships to economically
disadvantaged men and women and builds the capacity of Egyptian higher
education institutions to meet the demands of a modern global economy.
Programming across sectors in Egypt supports access to quality social
services, including those related to education and health. Funding also
aims to strengthen democratic governance in Egypt by working with civil
society, improving the rule of law and enhancing efficiency of service
delivery and transparency in government.
U.S. aid to Egypt across all sectors is targeted to strengthen
Egyptian actors and institutions that support democratic principles,
transparency and offer access to government services inclusively to
Egyptian citizens. USAID works with the Government of Egypt on
institutional reform initiatives in several sectors in order to improve
transparency, accountability, and access. For example, to support more
inclusive economic growth--essential for a stable and democratic
Egypt--the Agency works with public and private actors to strengthen
the enabling environment to allow Egyptian firms, particularly smaller
ones, to take full advantage of profit opportunities in the market. At
the request of the Government of Egypt, USAID also supports
decentralization of the Egyptian public sector through work reforming
Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Planning systems to increase
transparency and allow for inclusion of Egyptian citizens at the local
levels, including in budget oversight.This program seeks to identify
reform leaders in the legal sector in order to build capacity and
provide Egyptian citizens improved access to justice.
Support for a vibrant civil society is a cornerstone of any strong
democracy, and an important priority across the USG, in line with
President Obama's Stand with Civil Society agenda. USAID works to
empower Egyptian civil society actors across all sectors of its
assistance programs, including in education, economic development and
health. Education programming supports the active leadership role of
parents in communities through parent teacher associations which allow
for engagement and advocacy with schools and the government. Through a
one-stop-shop model piloted by USAID and managed by Egyptian business
associations, businessowners can register businesses with local
government in a transparent and efficient manner, which minimizes
opportunities for corruption. USAID also supports advocacy groups
working to facilitate the enabling environment for small and medium
entrepreneurs.
All of this work helps the USG build productive relationships with
key public and private actors while supporting the foundations for an
inclusive, democratic society. If confirmed as Administrator, I will
ensure USAID's continued commitment to promoting stability through
fostering rapid, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth and
essential democracy and governance principles in Egypt.
On Cuba
Question. Recent media reports indicate that the Cuban Government
has objected to the use of free Internet and the training of
independent journalists, pursuant to USAID's democracy programs, at the
U.S. Interests Section in Havana. Moreover, that this is one of the
current obstacles in the establishment of diplomatic relations.
a. Can you ensure the committee that the legally mandated
U.S. democracy programs will not be restricted or readjusted
pursuant to the ongoing negotiations with the Cuban Government?
b. Can you ensure the committee that the legally mandated
U.S. democracy programs will not be subject to any preapproval
or collaborative process with the Cuban dictatorship?
Answer. As I mentioned in my testimony, I remain committed to
programs that promote democracy, empower civil society, and foster
independent media in Cuba. As you know, the Agency helps facilitate the
free flow of uncensored information to, from, and within the island, as
well as provide connectivity to the Internet for the millions who
remain without access.
USAID works to promote free expression by supporting independent
journalists around the world, particularly in closed countries where
freedom of the press is lacking or independent journalists are under
threat.
USAID democracy programs in closed societies around the world,
including in Cuba, are not and will not be subject to preapproval by
governments.
Question. As you are aware, Section 109 of the LIBERTAD Act
authorizes the use of funds ``to support democracy-building efforts for
Cuba.'' These include:
(1) Published and informational matter, such as books, videos, and
cassettes, on transitions to democracy, human rights, and market
economies, to be made available to independent democratic groups in
Cuba.
(2) Humanitarian assistance to victims of political repression, and
their families.
(3) Support for democratic and human rights groups in Cuba.
(4) Support for visits and permanent deployment of independent
international human rights monitors in Cuba.
Can you ensure the committee that none of these funds
authorized for ``democracy-building efforts'' will be used to
support business promotion activities, of any sort, in Cuba?
Answer. USAID will continue with its traditional program areas of
humanitarian assistance to political prisoners, marginalized groups,
and their families, support for civil society and human rights, and the
free flow of uncensored information to, from and within the island.
It is my understanding that the Agency does not anticipate
supporting any new programs focused on business promotion activities.
If confirmed, I commit to continuing to work with your office as well
as others in the Congress to ensure the effectiveness and impact of
these programs.
Supplementary question
Question. Do you believe that USAID has a role to play in
supporting a democratic transition in Cuba? If so, what types of
programs in Cuba would you support as Administrator?
Answer. My understanding is that USAID will continue to support
efforts to promote democracy in Cuba, which is in keeping with the
USG's enduring objective--the emergence of a democratic, prosperous,
and stable Cuba.
If confirmed as Administrator, I will support programs for
democracy, civil society, and independent media in Cuba. These programs
are consistent with the administration's desire to empower the Cuban
people to exercise their fundamental civil and political liberties by
providing humanitarian assistance and support to civil society, and
through promoting the increased flow of information to, from, and
within Cuba.
If confirmed, I commit to continuing to work with your office and
others in the Congress to further our shared goal of enabling the Cuban
people to freely determine their own future.
On family planning
Question. If confirmed, can you guarantee there will be no change
in USAID's policy toward family planning services? In particular,
continued strict adherence to the Helms amendment?
Answer. As you know, this is a complex issue and there are deeply
held views among a diverse array of stakeholders. This administration
and I are committed to improving the health and safety of women and
girls around the globe, including survivors of sexual violence. If
confirmed, I can guarantee that I will listen to your concerns.
Supplementary question
Question. Can you clarify your views on existing law? If confirmed,
will you faithfully execute the law as it pertains to the Helms
amendment?
Answer. Let me assure you that, if confirmed as Administrator, I
will listen to your concerns, I will consult with you and other Members
of Congress, and I will faithfully execute the law across the full
range of my responsibilities, including all laws pertaining to
restrictions on the use of foreign assistance funds.
Supplementary question
Question. Please elaborate.
Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID fully abides by U.S.
law, including the Helms amendment, which precludes USAID from using
its resources to pay for the performance of abortion as a method of
family planning or to motivate or coerce any person to practions.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator menendez
Question. U.S. Assistance is not a blank check, especially not to
the Palestinian Authority. I am concerned that our assistance seems to
continue as usual, when the reality is that Palestinian leaders will
still not commit direct negotiations for a two-state solution and even
undermine them through maneuvers at the U.N. and the International
Criminal Court.
What will be your approach to U.S. assistance for the
Palestinian Authority and how you will address this with your
Israeli and Palestinian counterparts, if confirmed? What
changes can I expect to see in how we are reprogramming our
assistance in FY15 to make clear that this is not business as
usual?
Answer. Let me begin by saying that the administration is deeply
troubled by Palestinian action at the ICC and we continue to voice our
opposition to further actions to both the Palestinians and the
international community.
I understand that USAID, in conjunction with the State Department,
continues to review U.S. assistance to the Palestinians. In FY 2014, I
understand that a majority of USAID assistance for the West Bank and
Gaza went to programs that directly support the Palestinian people,
including humanitarian assistance following the conflict in Gaza. In FY
2015, USAID programs will focus on sectors that the administration
believes support our national interest and benefit average Palestinians
such as education, healthcare and water infrastructure programs.
Building the institutions of a viable future Palestinian state is a
core U.S. national security objective and the long-term focus of our
programs. The administration continues to believe that U.S. assistance
to the Palestinian people is an important tool in promoting regional
stability, economic development, and increased security for both
Palestinians and Israelis.
Question. Last year Congress unanimously passed the Ukraine Freedom
Support Act, which authorized assistance in support of democracy, civil
society, and energy security to Ukraine and throughout in the region.
The bill authorized $50 mil to help improve Ukraine's energy security;
$20 mil to strengthen civil society, support independent media, and
reduce corruption; $10 mil for Russian language broadcasting throughout
the region; and $20 mil to support democracy and civil society in
Russia. I would urge the appropriators to fully fund these efforts as
we look to bolster Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. I've seen
reports that there is some apprehension, especially in Europe, but
perhaps within our own government, to provide more robust assistance to
Ukraine for fear that it will fall victim to endemic corruption. As the
lead on this important legislation, I am supportive of this critical
assistance but it must be held accountable.
How will you work to ensure that our assistance to Ukraine
is accountable and transparent?
Answer. Ukraine remains the USAID'S top priority in the Europe and
Eurasia region. The Agency continues to allocate resources to support
the reforms that the Ukrainian Government and civil society have
prioritized, including anticorruption, local governance and
decentralization, and deregulation and competitiveness of the private
sector, especially agriculture and energy reform. USAID integrates
anticorruption activities into every project design in Ukraine. For
example, anticorruption measures are included in programs to support
the judiciary, education, health/pharmaceutical procurement, e-
governance, permitting, financial disclosure, and energy.
USAID is starting to see progress on implementation of
anticorruption reforms in Ukraine. More than a dozen key pieces of
legislation have been passed, including laws to establish the National
Anti-Corruption Bureau (NABU) and the National Anti-Corruption
Prevention Agency (NAPC). The Ukrainian Government is in the process of
standing up these two agencies, which are critical to fighting
corruption.
USAID has bolstered monitoring and independent evaluations in the
region by organizing monitoring workshops for implementing partner
staff, and contracting for independent evaluations of its programs to
ensure intended impact, including three such evaluations in Ukraine
last year. If confirmed, I will continue to ensure that USAID continues
to build on its efforts to strengthen monitoring and evaluation of the
Agency's programs, including in Ukraine.
Question. In light of the recent news reports of human rights and
labor rights in Southeast Asia, in particular the modern slavery camps
along the Thai-Malaysian border, and the anticipated completion of
negotiations on TPP, please provide an account of any USAID labor
capacity programs and funding that are currently in place to raise the
labor standards in Malaysia and Vietnam, anticipated TPP partners, and
Thailand, a prospective TPP partner.
Answer. USAID works across the Asia-Pacific region to protect and
promote fundamental human rights, such as the freedoms of expression
and assembly, to ensure that citizens have a voice and the ability to
choose their own leaders and influence the decisions that affect their
lives. These efforts help ensure that the solutions to the challenges
facing the region ultimately come from the people of the region.
The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) offers the United States
Government an opportunity to make progress in human rights, but to also
help reduce poverty and promote environmental and labor safeguards in
the Asia-Pacific, a region that is inextricably tied to our own future
stability and prosperity.
In Vietnam, the TPP is both strategically important to U.S.
Government relations with Vietnam, and also very important to Vietnam's
own development, as it serves as a force for important reforms and
improved accountability and transparency. As part of broader TPP-
related assistance, USAID's work complements robust technical
assistance provided by other U.S. Government entities, such as the
Department of Labor. USAID provides technical assistance to the
Government of Vietnam and the legal community to increase understanding
of TPP commitments including international labor standards and the
enforcement of laws and decrees in areas such as social dialogue, while
also supporting civil society efforts. USAID continues to closely
coordinate with the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the
interagency to assess and identify future labor-related assistance
needs.
Additionally, through USAID's Global Labor Program, the Agency is
supporting labor rights across the broader Asia region through programs
that work to reduce child labor, improve industrial relations, support
labor monitoring and training in apparel factories, and promote freedom
of association and collective bargaining. For example in Cambodia,
USAID supports union leaders and activists and works to improve working
conditions and protect freedom of association for vulnerable workers in
the garment, hotel and hospitality, and construction industries. In
part due to USAID facilitation, garment worker unions negotiated a 28-
percent increase in the minimum wage that was approved in November
2014. In addition, a new health project in Cambodia focused on garment
factory workers will improve worker-management dialogue on factory
compliance with health standards.
USAID also works to combat labor trafficking, a significant issue
for the Asia-Pacific, where incidents of migrants on land and sea in
need of humanitarian protection remain a serious concern for the U.S.
Government. The Asia-Pacific region also suffers from the largest
forced labor and sex trafficking market in the world. USAID is working
to address these issues on several fronts. Through its assistance to
regional institutions, the Agency stands ready to help Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) member states meet the standards for
protection of victims and other areas outlined in the ASEAN combating
trafficking in persons convention--expected to be endorsed in November
2015.
USAID is also addressing issues surrounding labor trafficking in
the fishing industry through assistance for repatriation and victim
support services for fishermen, many of whom have spent years working
on boats in harsh conditions and without pay. Last month, the Agency
provided such assistance to 59 Cambodian fishermen, who, along with
hundreds of others from Cambodia, Burma, Laos, and Thailand, were
rescued after being stranded in Eastern Indonesia. These efforts will
be supplemented by the new USAID OCEANS project, which will improve the
conditions of workers in the fishing industry.
Finally, through regional programming to counter trafficking in
persons, USAID is continuing a partnership with the International
Office of Migration to support a project that builds upon years of
successful interventions to prevent trafficking in persons through the
use of social media and information and communications technology. This
project will raise awareness among the general public and inspire
social action to prevent the most vulnerable from being trafficked.
All USAID antitrafficking efforts are closely aligned and
coordinated with prosecution and law enforcement efforts implemented by
the U.S. Department of State and other governments.
Question. In light of the anticipated completion of TPP
negotiations, are any plans in place to meet increased demands on the
Global Labor Program?
Answer. I understand that USAID is currently working with the State
Department to identify any gaps related to programmatic needs and
resource requirements in this area, and that new activities will depend
in part on proposals received in response to a solicitation for a new
5-year program.
With respect to the USAID Global Labor Program specifically, since
2011, the program has supported country programs in 10 countries
(Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, Honduras, Liberia, South Africa, Cambodia,
Bangladesh, Ukraine, and Georgia), as well as regional and subregional
programs in Central America/Latin America, southern Africa, south Asia/
Asia, and Eastern Europe. It has strengthened capacity of trade unions
and other labor-focused CSOs, supported legal representation for
workers to promote access to justice, and facilitated advocacy on
gender, labor migration and countertrafficking. If confirmed, I will
recommit the Agency to ensuring that there will be no gaps in
programming, the follow-on will be awarded competitively and budget
permitting, the program will be funded robustly.
Question. Please provide an outline of the current Global Labor
Program activities administered by USAID, by country and expenditure--
no detail requested at this time.
Answer. USAID has a strong tradition of supporting global labor
programs designed to foster democratic development and inclusive
economic growth. The Agency's labor programming directly serves these
priorities by strengthening independent and democratic worker
organizations and other labor-related civil society organizations, and
promoting international labor standards. The current Global Labor
Program is a 5-year (2011-2016) award implemented by Solidarity Center.
In FY 2015, USAID is programming $7.5 million for work in nine
countries and also regional and subregional programs in Latin America,
southern Africa, and South and Southeast Asia. This funding supports
four thematic research and advocacy programs on gender, migration and
trafficking, informal work, and rule of law. This core programming is
supplemented by an associate award in Colombia, administered by USAID/
Colombia.
The breakdown of expenditures for FY 2015 by country, region and
for the global thematic programs is as follows:
Africa regional: $332,661; Liberia: $325,905; South Africa:
$810,249; Americas regional: $187,570; Brazil: $626,200;
Mexico: $592,708; Honduras: $392,230; Central America
subregional: $91,623; Georgia: $562,262; Ukraine: $654,611;
Asia regional: $181,620; South Asia subregional: $207,836;
Cambodia: $527,427; Bangladesh: $516,102; Global Technical:
$816,343; Operating Expenses: $674,653.
Question. As you know, the labor and environmental chapters of our
free trade agreements are particularly important to me and a lot of my
Senate colleagues. But I am afraid that USAID does not take the issue
of trade capacity-building seriously enough. With the exception of a
few places where Congress requires it, USAID has chosen to spend little
or no money called for in our trade agreements to support labor
capacity-building. USAID has an opportunity to use trade capacity-
building funds to support labor capacity-building within its Global
Labor Program, which is currently funded only with democracy, rights,
and governance funding. I need your assurance that trade capacity-
building funds will be used as we intended--to support labor rights on
the ground with our trading partners who lack the capacity and
sometimes the will to take that on themselves. I believe we need to
step up and use trade capacity-building funds to increase USAID's
Global Labor Program from its current $7.5 million to $10 million.
If confirmed, will you agree to work with my office to
ensure that the appropriate funds are disbursed and included in
the Global Labor Program so that we can implement the labor
provisions in our trade agreements?
Answer. I strongly share your view of promoting labor rights in the
context of our trade priorities and if confirmed, I would be pleased to
work with the committee to see that USAID's Global Labor Program is
responsive to these priorities.
I understand that in response to congressional direction to provide
labor capacity-building support for countries in the Western Hemisphere
with which the United States has free trade agreements, USAID has
supported projects that have worked with business and civil society to
strengthen the demand for effective implementation of labor standards.
USAID's review of these programs confirmed that the Agency's strengths
are best deployed in demand-side programming with industry to build the
case for better labor practices that enhance competitiveness, and with
civil society to strengthen the ability of workers to play a
constructive role in monitoring and improving labor standards.
If confirmed, I will review the current level of funding with your
recommendation in mind and will consult with the committee as we
determine the appropriate funding levels for current and future global
labor capacity building.
Question. The Review on Antimicrobial Resistance, convened by the
Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, has projected that of all the
antimicrobial infections, TB is projected to account for a quarter of
the 10 million deaths expected from these infections due to
antimicrobial resistance by 2050. The G7 Group of Counties recently
highlighted Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) as a top priority, and there
is growing momentum for a United Nations High-Level Meeting on AMR to
be held at U.N. Headquarters in New York in 2016.
Will you commit to working to ensure, if confirmed, that
drug resistant tuberculosis (TB) has a prominent place on the
agenda of this High-Level Meeting as well as any political
declaration coming out of the meeting?
Answer. Yes, if confirmed as USAID Administrator, I will commit to
working to ensure drug-resistant TB has a prominent place on the
agenda. Drug-resistant TB is the one of the largest antimicrobial
resistance issues globally. If confirmed, I will ensure USAID, as the
lead U.S. Government agency for international TB, continues to lead
coordination of U.S. Government global TB efforts, support for global
initiatives, and support to countries to ensure the further development
and expansion of quality programs to address TB and drug-resistant TB
using the best tools and treatments available.
Question. The White House is leading the development of an
interagency action plan on drug resistant tuberculosis as a companion
to the White House's National Action Plan for Combating Antibiotic-
Resistant Bacteria.
How will USAID's contribution to this plan ensure
accountability and specify clear and ambitious milestones for
reducing drug resistant TB? Will you commit to ensuring, if
confirmed, that the USAID proposal specifies the additional
funding necessary to reach these milestones and get ahead of
the growing crisis of drug resistant TB?
Answer. The White House action plan on drug-resistant tuberculosis
(DR-TB) will have clear and ambitious milestones. The plan will build
on the current USAID TB portfolio and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
TB, and Malaria. TB grants will accelerate progress toward achieving
the goals laid out in the U.S. Government TB Strategy and contribute to
the global effort to end the pandemic. USAID will be leading the
international part of the plan. It will focus on the development and
implementation of faster and better quality diagnostics and treatment
regimens, prioritizing countries with the highest burdens of drug-
resistant TB to maximize limited resources and to end TB as a major
cause of morbidity and mortality, and as a global health security
threat. The rollout of new drugs and regimens will be critical to
saving lives and preventing the development and transmission of deadly
drug-resistant TB. The next step in this fast-track process is a
stakeholder forum to ensure input from a wide spectrum of partners.
While I cannot guarantee future funding levels, I will, if confirmed,
help ensure USAID continues its efforts to curb the epidemic by
ensuring good quality TB programs that appropriately treat and cure
patients of the disease, and prevent the emergence and spread of drug-
resistant strains.
Question. According to Freedom House, after a decade and a half of
increasing democratic trends, Africa experienced significant
backsliding between 2005 and 2013. It is clear the White House is
interested in, and committed to, maintaining good relations with Africa
as evidenced by initiatives such as Feed the Future, Power Africa, the
Young African Leadership Initiative, and the Partnership for Growth,
which includes two African countries. I am concerned, however, that we
are not focused enough on traditional development priorities,
specifically in the area of Democracy and Governance.
a. To your knowledge, does USAID have a medium to long-term
democracy and governance strategy for Africa? If so, what is
it, and does it need to be updated or changed in any way in
your estimation?
b. If confirmed, will you commit to work with the committee
to devise a robustly funded democracy and governance strategy
for Africa?
c. Elections are an important indicator of the democratic
health of a country, but support for elections alone does not
build the institutions that support democracy. What has been
our approach to ensuring the investments we are making to
support key elections in Africa, such as those made in Nigeria
earlier this year, are followed by programs and activities that
help citizens ensure that those they elect are accountable to
the people they are supposed to represent?
d. If confirmed, will you commit to ensuring that the
elections support we provide in Africa is incorporated into a
broader governance strategy?
Answer. USAID has been a leader in supporting the President's
policies on human rights and democratic governance as fundamental
objectives of a whole-of-government strategy toward Africa. I am aware
that during this administration USAID has issued a new strategy on
democracy, human rights, and governance. The new strategy codifies a
more holistic approach to USAID's programming in this sector by
focusing on participation, inclusion, and accountability, while
elevating human rights and integration of programming across economic
and social sectors.
One of USAID's unique strengths is its field-based orientation, in
which its missions abroad are the incubators and operational nerve
centers of its work. With policy guidance and technical support from
Washington, USAID bilateral missions in Africa develop their own
multiyear country development cooperation strategies. They do so in
close collaboration with U.S. Embassy counterparts, host-country
partners, and often with other donors, foundations, and the private
sector. To my knowledge, virtually every USAID mission in Africa has a
medium to long-term strategic objective focused on supporting
democracy, human rights, and governance. These objectives vary
significantly based on the specific challenges faced in each country,
while aligning with the new strategy on democracy, human rights, and
governance. They can also change over time in response to democratic
breakthroughs or backsliding.
For example, in Ghana, one of the models of democratic governance
in Africa, USAID works in close partnership with national government
officials and civil society to strengthen local district government
institutions and improve service delivery. In post-conflict countries
such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, USAID programs reconcile
communities separated by war, support key governance reforms, and help
extend state authority to the people. In Zimbabwe, under constant
threat of closing political space, USAID and its partners provide
critical support to human rights defenders and civil society activists
who are trying to maintain their basic freedoms.
And in Nigeria, as well as more than a dozen other African
countries, USAID focuses and concentrates its resources to ensure that
election assistance is embedded in long-term democracy, rights, and
governance strategies. Doing so allows USAID to support reformers who
can seize the window of opportunity provided by free, fair, and
credible elections to promote policy changes, strengthen governance
institutions, expand basic freedoms, and improve the systems of checks
and balances that hold leaders accountable to the people who elected
them.
In my estimation, USAID's current process for achieving its
democracy strategy in Africa is appropriate: setting broad policy and
strategy goals in Washington, and allowing USAID missions to develop
their own country-specific responses to achieving those goals, for
which they are then held accountable. I also believe that USAID's
election assistance programs are most effective and appropriate as part
of a holistic democracy, human rights and governance strategy.
If confirmed, I will make this area one of my priorities and I look
forward to working with Congress to maximize the impact and
effectiveness of this program.
Question. As I am sure you are aware, I have been working with
State Department and USAID to ensure that our Foreign Service
adequately represents the diversity of our population. With 18 months
left in this administration, do I have a commitment from you that you
will make recruitment and retention of diverse candidates a priority at
USAID?
Answer. Recruiting and retaining a diverse and skilled workforce is
critical to meeting the mission of USAID, and is of great importance to
me personally. If confirmed as Administrator, I will work with USAID
leadership to strengthen efforts to ensure that USAID's workforce is
reflective of our population.
I am pleased that the 2015 Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development
Review (QDDR) specifically addresses the need to increase our diversity
and provides specific focus areas that I fully support. These areas
include enhancing work requirements for USAID managers about the need
to foster diversity and inclusion in the workplace, increasing outreach
to our veterans, sustaining the numbers of fellowships offered, and
initiating an early identification program, focusing on students from
underrepresented communities who have an interest in public service.
USAID is engaging in targeted outreach activities and programs that
are focused on building a diverse workforce, which I will look to
support and expand. This outreach is designed to increase the diversity
of applicants who apply for direct-hire positions at USAID, as well as
to other qualified applicants who may apply through the Disability
Employment Program, the Veterans Employment Initiative, and USAID's
Internship Program.
The Donald Payne International Development Fellowship Program
(Payne Fellowship Program) has resulted in three classes of fellows
with a highly diverse representation. These fellows enter USAID's
Foreign Service upon completion of the program.
If confirmed, I will work with USAID leadership to improve
retention of diverse employees (and all employees) through several
actions including: (1) increasing training for managers and employees
tailored specifically to the issues of diversity and inclusion; (2)
implementing exit interviews and surveys to provide the Agency with
data regarding why employees resign, as well as their impressions of
diversity and inclusion at USAID, so that the Agency can take
appropriate action; and, (3) piloting programs that focus on diversity
and inclusion, such as the Office of Personnel Management's Diversity
and Inclusion Dialogue Program.
If confirmed, I am committed to making recruitment and the
retention of diverse candidates a high priority of my tenure with
USAID.
Question. I am very concerned by the state of civil society in
Egypt. At a time when analysts are reporting that the suppression of
nonviolent political dissent in Egypt is now worse than at any time
during the Mubarak regime, only $5 million out of a total of $150
million in Economic Support Funds to Egypt is designated for democracy
and governance in the administration's FY 2016 request. In comparison,
the administration has requested $47 million for democracy and
governance programming in Jordan, a country whose population is roughly
8 percent of Egypt's.
If confirmed, how would you be able to support democracy
and governance in Egypt and counter the erosion of civil
society there, given the subject's seemingly low priority in
the administration's budget request?
Answer. USAID resources in Egypt are targeted toward supporting
democratic principles and civil society across all sectors. The Agency
works to empower Egyptian civil society actors throughout its
assistance program, including in education, economic development and
health. USAID programming works to reinforce democratic principles,
transparency and provide access to government services by all parts of
Egyptian society. USAID supports decentralization of the Egyptian
Government through work reforming the Ministry of Finance and Ministry
of Planning systems to increase transparency and allow for inclusion of
Egyptian citizens at the local levels, including in budget oversight.
This program seeks to identify reform champions in the legal sector and
provide Egyptian citizens improved access to justice. Education
programs support the active leadership role of parents in communities
through parent/teacher associations which allow for engagement and
advocacy with school principals and local government officials. Through
a one-stop-shop model piloted by USAID and managed by Egyptian business
associations, businessowners can register businesses with local
government in a transparent and efficient manner, which minimizes
opportunities for corruption. USAID also supports advocacy groups
working to facilitate the enabling environment for small and medium
entrepreneurs.
While advancing certain democracy, rights, and governance issues is
a challenge in the current environment, USAID is moving forward with a
significant direct grants program to advance the role of civil society
in promoting human rights. Civil society organizations are working to
combat gender-based violence, promote women's empowerment, counter
trafficking in persons, promote religious tolerance, and support rights
of people with disabilities. Bilateral programs include support to
civil society organizations that promote youth empowerment and youth
engagement in leadership roles in the communities in which they live.
For example, civil society organizations offer students the opportunity
to participate in programs that promote youth values of tolerance and
peace within the Egyptian identity and teach principles of sustainable
development and citizenship.
If confirmed as Administrator, I will ensure USAID's continued
commitment to promoting essential democracy and governance principles
in Egypt as consistent with President Obama's Stand with Civil Society
agenda.
Question. Continued progress in Tunisia's democratic transition is
critical and economic reform will be essential to the ongoing success
of that transition. Tunisia needs assistance in building a regulatory
environment that facilitates both foreign and domestic investment,
especially in providing access to capital for small- and medium-sized
enterprises.
In your view, how can U.S. assistance most effectively help
create this environment? If confirmed, how will you prioritize
this assistance?
Answer. I share your interest in ensuring that the U.S. Government
provides robust and targeted assistance during this critical period in
Tunisia's history. I believe Tunisia demonstrates great potential for a
successful transition, and last year, USAID reopened its office in
Tunis after 20 years--a clear demonstration of the U.S. Government's
continued support for a democratic Tunisia.
USAID is supporting the Government of Tunisia's economic reform
agenda in tax and customs policy which will help create a more
attractive investment climate for both domestic and international
investors. During President Caid Essebsi's visit, Secretary of Commerce
Pritzker convened a roundtable of CEOs from top U.S. corporations,
including Google, Bechtel, and General Electric. Encouraged by the
Government of Tunisia's progress, U.S. companies are poised to take
advantage of investment opportunities in Tunisia. Additionally, USAID's
work with the Government of Tunisia on customs policy reform will
advance the implementation of the World Trade Organization's Agreement
on Trade Facilitation (Bali, 2012) which expedites the movement,
release and clearance of goods.
USAID programs support the Tunisian people as they lay the
foundation for economic prosperity and democratic governance. USAID is
creating job opportunities for Tunisian youth by helping small- and
medium-sized enterprises to increase productivity and expand
employment; and then matching and coaching young Tunisian men and women
to fill these new jobs. USAID is also providing financing to small- and
medium-sized enterprises through the Tunisian-American Enterprise Fund.
Question. Hundreds of thousands of Christians, Yezidis, and other
religious minorities have been made homeless by ISIL's depravity and
continue to live as displaced persons without adequate access to
shelter, food, medical care or education. Many women from these
communities have been kidnapped and subjected to horrific sexual
violence.
If confirmed, how will you work with host governments to
ensure that assistance reaches these communities and that
survivors of sexual violence at the hands of ISIL are given the
help they need to rebuild their lives?
Answer. USAID strives to include and be sensitive to the needs of
religious and ethnic minorities in all of its programming. All U.S.
Government humanitarian assistance is delivered on an impartial basis
and is open to every household and community in acute need, regardless
of ethnicity or faith. If confirmed as USAID Administrator, I will
ensure that the Agency continues to uphold these principles.
In both Syria and Iraq, USAID humanitarian assistance is provided
on a countrywide basis and is focused on the populations in greatest
need who can be reached by the Agency's humanitarian partners. USAID
has provided over $2 billion in humanitarian assistance for displaced
Syrians since fiscal year 2012 and nearly $76 million in humanitarian
assistance for displaced Iraqis since the start of FY 2014.
In Syria, USAID humanitarian assistance reaches into all 14
governorates and 63 districts, including those in which religious
minority communities reside or are hosted as internally displaced
persons (IDPs). In Iraq, the majority of humanitarian assistance is
provided to address acute needs among the IDP population in the Iraqi
Region of Kurdistan (IRK), which accounts for over 40 percent of that
country's total displaced population. For example, approximately 70
percent of all humanitarian aid provided by USAID's Office for U.S.
Foreign Disaster Assistance since FY 2014 has served Iraqi IDPs in the
IRK--where the majority of displaced Iraqi religious minorities are
seeking shelter.
USAID humanitarian assistance inside Syria and Iraq is focused on
provision to vulnerable IDPs of food and other relief commodities,
shelter (including repairs), water and sanitation, health care,
education, protection (including specialized services for women,
children, and survivors of sexual and gender-based violence), and
humanitarian coordination and logistics.
In all its programs in Syria and Iraq, the Agency strives to
address the protection needs of the most vulnerable--including women,
girls and boys in displaced communities. For example, in Iraq, USAID
supports humanitarian assistance programs that both mainstream
protection and deliver direct, specialized services to vulnerable
communities.
Specific activities include recruitment of female health workers,
to ensure health services are equally accessible for women and girls as
well as men and boys, mobile ``child-friendly'' spaces and psychosocial
first aid for traumatized children, emergency aid focused on the
immediate needs of pregnant women in vulnerable conditions, and
provision of specialized counseling and referral services to survivors
of sexual and gender-based violence.
USAID has also provided funding to the International Organization
for Migration (IOM) to support its wider protection activities, which
reached nearly 1 million IDPs in Iraq. As a component of outreach to
the wider IDP population, this included direct psychosocial support to
Christian and Yezidi IDPs in transit sites in northern Iraq.
In those neighboring countries hosting large numbers of displaced
Syrians and Iraqis, USAID's nonhumanitarian programming also seeks to
address the needs of religious minority communities within the context
of the wider crisis. The Agency views inclusion of minorities as a key
component of advancing democracy and stability.
For example, I understand that since 2007 USAID has provided over
$40 million in economic and development assistance directly benefiting
Iraq's minority communities including Christian, Yezidi, Shabak, and
Sabean-Mandaean groups. The Agency's Jordan community engagement
program works with communities hosting Syrian refugees, and, in Egypt,
USAID works with faith-based organizations to promote religious
tolerance and diversity.
In addition, USAID has hosted various delegations of Iraqi
religious minorities to discuss and coordinate the U.S. Government
humanitarian response to their displacement as a result of ISIL
actions. This has included, inter alia, representatives of the
Assyrian, Chaldean, Orthodox, Catholic, and Yezidi communities. In the
field, USAID humanitarian assistance teams meet regularly with
representatives of ethnic and religious minority diaspora and local
groups serving displaced communities, as well as with international
partners serving IDPs. They also coordinate closely with the U.N. and
relevant government institutions in Iraq and those host countries for
displaced Syrians and Iraqis in order to ensure all IDP communities'
needs are taken into account.
Question. In 2011 the Arab Spring protests and calls for nonviolent
reform offered tremendous hope for the potential of the Middle East
region. Four years later we face a long, cold winter with many states
reverting to old bad habits of closing off all avenues for nonviolent
political expression or economic opportunity. Worse yet, we are facing
failed, or close to failing, states in Yemen, Libya, and Syria. In the
face of such unpredictability, instability, and violence the U.S.
diplomatic presence and USAID field offices have been forced to draw
down or close. In other areas, governments are actively confronting
USAID funded programs and projects.
How are you thinking about U.S. assistance and development
engagement in the Middle East and North Africa against this
depressing and alarming backdrop? Do we need to change the way
we do business, or the missions we pursue, in the region?
Answer. USAID works with local and international partners to
address the tremendous needs in the Middle East and North Africa. USAID
recognizes that capable and accountable governance institutions are
crucial to the sustainability of our development investments, which is
why the Agency seeks to integrate democracy, human rights, and
governance principles and practices across all programming.
USAID's approach in the Middle East is twofold; the Agency works
not only with governments, but also at a grassroots level, changing the
lives of individuals and transforming communities. USAID works closely
with national governments where that is possible, and where national-
level governance institutions are lacking, at the local level, with
municipal councils or local civil society, to help meet the immediate
needs of the people in the region as well as build sustainable local
governance structures that can support a move to resilient democratic
societies. Local- and municipal-level governance issues are an
increasingly important component to USAID's work in the region,
especially in communities affected by conflict and crisis. Key elements
in all USAID programs are a deep analysis of the political context,
supporting citizen engagement in policymaking and service delivery, and
promoting the rights of all citizens and groups to ensure equitable
development gains. USAID programs represent a long-term investment in
the people and communities of the Middle East and North Africa and
build on the Agency's mission to partner to end extreme poverty and
promote resilient, democratic societies while advancing our own
security and prosperity.
USAID is constantly reassessing the way it does business and the
specific programs in which it invests. Each country and regional
program begins with a careful assessment of local needs and capacity
for reform. Once programs are implemented they are carefully monitored
and evaluated for effectiveness and lessons learned. Security concerns
remain a significant challenge, and the security of USAID staff and
implementing partners is paramount. In places where USAID has no
direct-hire staff on the ground, the Agency uses local and
international partners as well as remote management techniques to
continue and ensure close oversight of USAID programs.
If confirmed, I look forward to working with the Congress and our
implementing partners to maximize the efficacy and impact of our work
in the Middle East and elsewhere throughout the world.
Question. In response to the question about USAID's contribution to
the U.S. Government TB strategy, you mentioned that you would ``help
ensure USAID continues its efforts to curb the epidemic by ensuring
good quality TB programs that appropriately treat and cure patients of
the disease, and prevent the emergence and spread of drug-resistant
strains.'' As its contribution to the interagency action plan on drug-
resistant tuberculosis, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
submitted recommendations that clearly identify the funding needed to
carry out the activities.
Has USAID identified funding needs, given the objectives of
the plan? If not, why not?
How meaningful can a strategy be unless resources needs are
identified, to enable the agency to not only continue efforts
but intensify them and rapidly build country capacity to have a
much greater impact on TB?
Answer. The White House National Action Plan on multidrug resistant
tuberculosis (MDR-TB) will have clear and ambitious milestones. USAID
will lead the international component of the plan, building on the
current USAID TB portfolio and the Global Fund to Fight AIDS,
Tuberculosis, and Malaria. It will focus on the development and
implementation of faster and better quality diagnostics and treatment
regimens, prioritizing countries with the highest burdens of drug-
resistant TB to maximize limited resources and end TB as a major cause
of morbidity and mortality and as a global health security threat. The
rollout of new drugs and regimens will be critical to saving lives and
preventing the development and transmission of deadly drug-resistant
TB.
The process includes critical opportunities to receive feedback
from the broader global health community, including a stakeholder
forum, on important aspects to include in the plan. Guided by the
strategy, stakeholder feedback, and data and evidence, USAID will do
its part to identify the resources needed to implement the plan and
focus on how to maximize the effectiveness of those resources. However,
combating TB is a global problem and a shared responsibility that
requires commitments from other donor partners and countries themselves
to do more. As I testified, it is also critical to mobilize other
countries to do more in this area--both with respect to TB and to
health systems more broadly. If confirmed, I will play a leadership
role in this regard and ensure that USAID continues its efforts to curb
the epidemic by ensuring good quality TB programs that appropriately
treat and cure patients of the disease, and prevent the emergence and
spread of multidrug resistant strains.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator flake
Question. In addition to the devastating loss of life and breakdown
of the affected countries' health care systems, we have seen the
economies of these countries near collapse as economic activity ground
to a halt, investors and contractors fled, farming ceased, and building
and maintaining of key infrastructure projects was suspended. As
private investments in airports, roads, seaports, and electricity
generation and distribution will be vital to for economic recovery,
what is USAID doing in these areas to reinvigorate private economies
that will be necessary for the long-term stability of affected
countries?
Answer. Having coordinated the USG's international response to the
Ebola epidemic while at the National Security Council, I am personally
committed to working in the Ebola-affected countries to help
reinvigorate their economies, using both Ebola emergency funds and base
development assistance funds. If confirmed, I will ensure USAID
continues these important efforts. Examples of USAID's support to
revive the economies of the Ebola-affected countries include:
Through the Power Africa Initiative, USAID is engaging in a
variety of areas that will improve electricity generation and
distribution.
USAID/Liberia replicates appropriate scale private models
to supply energy to unserved rural areas through the design
and build of small-scale facilities that demonstrate
renewable energy technologies. This work is buttressed by a
cooperative agreement with the National Rural
Electrification Cooperative of America (NRECA), which is
working with rural communities to manage electrical
generation and distribution.
USAID/Liberia is working to engage in active diplomacy and
dialogue with local governments, other donors, and their
implementing partners to encourage and facilitate the rapid
completion of work on the Mt. Coffee hydropower station;
three new power plants to add 38 MW of affordable
electricity to the grid; the extension of the West Africa
Power Pool; and other key public sector infrastructure
projects.
USAID/Liberia is working with local banks to demonstrate
the business case for affordable, sustainable, renewable
energy solutions beyond the grid. Furthermore, USAID
technical assistance has helped with the development of
draft legislation that will allow for the entry of private
sector actors in generation and distribution.
USAID/Guinea is exploring public private partnership (PPP)
opportunities in the energy sector in both Guinea and
Sierra Leone through collaboration with the member agencies
in Power Africa.
In addition, USAID is supporting efforts to rebuild
critical infrastructure in the Ebola-affected countries in
order to attract private investment and improve the lives of
those impacted by the crisis.
USAID/Liberia is working to rehabilitate rural farm to
market roads and build the capacity of the Ministry of
Public Works to maintain them, which will stimulate broader
private sector activity in agricultural value chains,
including transportation and marketing.
In all three countries, USAID is supporting investments in
digital infrastructure by working with donors and partners
to adopt a ``dig once'' strategy for appropriate road
construction projects intended to reduce the combined costs
of road construction and broadband connectivity access and
advancement. Investments in digital infrastructure support
roads, airports, seaports, and electricity generation.
Through advancement in e-payments platforms, USAID/Liberia
is working to enable and increase ease of payments for on-
grid electricity, as well as pay-as-you-go models in all
three countries using emergency funds. In order to advance
infrastructure, policy reforms are required to support the
development of public-private partnerships (PPPs) across
all infrastructure. USAID is collaborating with multiple
teams and stakeholders to define a combined vision and
requirements for the affected country governments in order
to catalyze and spur PPPs that will create infrastructure
growth.
USAID/Liberia's efforts to increase access to potable
water in three cities will contribute to a healthier and
more productive workforce attractive to the private sector,
as well as facilitate development of industry and
agriculture in those locations.
USAID/Liberia and partners are completing the construction
of 85 kilometers of feeder roads in support of other USG-
funded agricultural activities designed under the Feed the
Future Initiative and food security programs.
USAID is also actively engaging the private sector to
leverage their ideas and encourage private sector investment in
the three affected countries.
USAID recently published two new calls for proposals under
its Global Development Alliance that focus on all three
countries to prioritize coinvestment with the private
sector to harness ideas, capacity, and private resources to
bolster economic activities and investments in
infrastructure, improve local health systems, and promote
global health security, all of which are aimed at
accelerating recovery and building resiliency in the West
African communities affected by the Ebola epidemic.
In addition, the Agency seeks to harness capacity and
resources from the local, regional, and international
private sector around partnerships that strengthen
information and communications technology, energy
infrastructure, social programming, health care, and
education.
Through the Feed the Future initiative, the Agency is
working to engage the infrastructure, and resources of the
private sector, foundations, and other partners, including
in-country partners, to foster broad-based food security in
the short, medium, and long term.
The PPP strategy in 2015 focuses on reestablishing private
sector confidence to resume business operations through
continuous communication and updates about market
conditions. USAID is also providing technical assistance to
help Liberia develop a PPP policy that will attract
investment across a range of industry and infrastructure
projects.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator perdue
On Smith's priorities
Question. Assuming you are confirmed, you will only have 18 months
in office once you come into office, and there are certainly a host of
issues you could dive into. Can you talk about some of these priority
areas where you would really like to make a change?
Answer. Should I have the honor of being confirmed, I will pursue
four priorities.
(1) If confirmed, I will focus the Agency on programs that are
achieving results and will be selective about initiating new
commitments. I will work with Congress to institutionalize successful
programs, including Feed the Future, Power Africa, and our efforts in
maternal and child health.
(2) If confirmed, I will provide the leadership, guidance, and
tools needed to enable USAID's staff in Washington and the field to
deliver against our most urgent priorities. This includes expanding the
Agency's work and impact on democracy, rights, and governance. This
also means expanding the Agency's impact on human trafficking and
corruption, laying the groundwork for the success of a critically
important strategy for Central America, and ensuring an equally
important transition in Afghanistan.
(3) If confirmed, I will act quickly to ensure that the Agency
maintains global leadership and agility in responding to increasingly
complex humanitarian crises around the world. When a natural disaster
strikes or a humanitarian catastrophe is imminent, the Agency is and
should be among the first on the ground to help those in need, and in a
world rife with crises, I believe it is critical to ensure that the
Agency remains one step ahead.
I will also work with this committee and other stakeholders to
pursue meaningful food aid reform that will enable us to reach more
people, more quickly, in times of need--all while maintaining our
historic partnership with U.S. farmers and maritime.
(4) If confirmed, I will focus on further strengthening the
institution. That means building on the reform agenda launched by
Administrator Rajiv Shah. This will involve expanding the capacity of
the Agency to mobilize resources and engagement from other partners; to
draw on science, technology, and innovation to address development
challenges; and to increase investment in effective local solutions.
Strengthening the institution involves tackling some of the
management and operational challenges facing an agency that manages
resources across over 80 countries, often in complex environments. The
Agency must ensure that American taxpayer dollars are spent
responsibly. It must identify successful programs, learn from prior
mistakes, apply lessons learned, and share best practices--all in an
open and transparent way. If progress is not being made, it must take
corrective action or terminate projects.
Strengthening USAID also means supporting and listening to its
people, both here in Washington and overseas. These are men and women
with knowledge, institutional memory, and invaluable insight. It is my
goal to give them the visibility, respect, and gratitude that they
deserve.
On leveraging partners to make American aid go further
Question. Ms. Smith, how do you recommend we use our leadership to
work with other nations to do more?
Answer. If confirmed, I will encourage other nations to join USAID
in addressing the world's development and humanitarian challenges--
especially in this time of unprecedented need when no country can--or
should--singlehandedly meet global demands.
Leveraging our development resources is a key step to successfully
achieving USAID's goals as a 21st century development agency. If
confirmed as Administrator, I will work with USAID leadership to more
deeply integrate partnership and leveraging of external resources into
USAID program design and implementation.
Using U.S. development assistance in a way that catalyzes
additional financing for development from other countries, the private
sector, multilateral institutions, and foundations is a key pillar of
the U.S. approach to development, as is the recognition that
sustainable development requires host-country buy-in and leadership.
These elements are embodied in initiatives such as Power Africa and
Feed the Future. They are also core priorities for the U.S. Government
heading into the Third U.N. Conference on Financing for Development in
July.
I am aware that USAID has progressed substantially over the last
several years in developing closer coordination with a number of other
international donors. Sweden, the United Kingdom, and Australia have
become even more important partners. If confirmed, I will continue to
support and expand these relationships as a priority.
At the invitation of President Obama, the Government of Sweden
recently committed $1 billion to Power Africa, an initiative to double
access to energy in sub-Saharan Africa. The early success of Power
Africa--transactions expected to generate more than 4,100 megawatts
have already reached financial close--played a critical role in
securing Sweden's commitment. If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID
uses this power of example to bring in more donors for Power Africa and
other successful initiatives.
On effectiveness and efficiency of aid
Question. I certainly understand that if our efforts in assistance
are a mile wide and an inch deep, we will not be very effective.
How do you plan to focus in certain areas to make our aid
go the furthest?
What will your methods be for determining where to double
down on American aid so we can achieve maximum impact?
Answer. Focusing resources--both financial and staffing--in
priority countries is essential for maximum impact. If confirmed as
Administrator, I will strengthen the Agency's Selectivity and Focus
process. This process was launched in 2012 in response to Presidential
Policy Directive (PPD-6), which mandated that the Agency focus
development efforts by being more selective about the countries and
sectors in which it works. Since 2010, the Agency's efforts in
Selectivity and Focus have reduced the number of sectoral program areas
by 40 percent, enabling country missions to be more focused on top
priority activities.
If confirmed as Administrator, USAID will continue to make hard
choices about how to allocate attention and resources across countries,
regions, and sectors. Under my leadership, if confirmed, the Agency
will closely consider issues of fragility and weigh the impact and
potential savings of investing in resilience. It will continue to
concentrate resources through better alignment of staffing and funding
in support of those countries and programs that yield the greatest
impact. Further, I will continue to strengthen the use of Country
Development Cooperation Strategies (CDCS) to ensure analysis of changes
in country situations and status in the medium term, and support
evaluations and interim Agencywide assessments to inform decisions
about adjustments in resource allocations.
Question. A recent Office of Inspector General's report noted that
Presidential initiatives--not just Congressional Earmarks--are
stymieing USAID Missions from allocating the correct type of funding to
meet needs identified in country as the most important. Ms. Smith, as a
development expert, you know the importance of ``country ownership''
and ensuring our assistance programs are actually reflecting the top
priorities of the countries in which USAID works.
If confirmed as Administrator, what would you do to ensure
that priorities identified at the mission level are
incorporated into final budget submissions to Congress and that
Presidential initiatives--while important--do not distort the
type of assistance USAID ends up providing to countries?
Answer. I understand that it is a critical priority at USAID to
ensure that its missions receive the funding they need, despite the
constrained budget environment in which they operate. If confirmed as
Administrator, I will continue to refine our planning and strategy
processes and ensure that mission priorities are integrated into our
budget development process.
I believe that it is important to the national security of our
country that USAID continues to be a global leader in addressing the
world's most critical development challenges. If confirmed, I will work
to ensure that these efforts are mutually reinforcing with the local
priorities specific to a country or region, and reflect the on-the-
ground knowledge and expertise of the Agency's field staff.
Question. What percentage of your budget is spent on overhead
versus directed to assistance? Are there efficiencies that can be found
in overhead savings?
Answer. Based on my initial briefings, I understand that in FY
2015, the Agency's Operating Expense (OE) appropriation accounted for
approximately 6.2 percent of its total program budget.
I understand that USAID continues to implement ambitious
operational reforms to improve management processes and achieve
efficiencies in areas such as information technology, travel, real
property disposals, insourcing, and space optimization. If confirmed, I
am committed to reviewing these as well as other areas where we might
identify additional efficiencies.
On increasing transparency
Question. USAID has committed to improving transparency in
government.
What are your plans for improving the quality and
availability of data about USAID spending, so that anyone can
trace each dollar right down to the specific project or
activity where it is spent?
Answer. Aid transparency is essential for helping recipient
governments manage their aid flows, for empowering citizens to hold
governments accountable for the use of assistance, and for supporting
evidence-based, data-driven approaches to foreign aid.
The administration has placed great emphasis on transparency and
openness across the government and USAID is taking a leading role in
helping the U.S. Government further its commitment to enhancing aid
transparency as a way of increasing the efficacy of development efforts
and promoting international accountability. In October 2014, USAID
released its first ever Open Data policy and regularly posts datasets
to www.usaid.gov/data.
If confirmed as Administrator, I will work with USAID leadership to
advance efforts that are currently under way to increase the
transparency of our funding and programming, on both the development
and humanitarian fronts. In particular, if confirmed, I am committed to
increasing the number and quality of evaluations posted online, as well
as regularly posting more and improved data to the International Aid
Transparency Initiative (IATI) and ForeignAssistance.gov.
On results-driven aid
Question. Can you tell us what systems should be in place to ensure
that foreign aid evaluations are used to feed back into the loop? To be
used to guide program design and policy decisionmaking?
Answer. USAID has established systems to ensure that quality
evaluations are undertaken and that results are used for program
improvements and redesigns. If confirmed as Administrator, I will work
to elevate the quality and use of monitoring and evaluations in USAID.
I will also ensure that new officers continue training in evaluation,
monitoring, and integrating findings to ensure impact.
It is my understanding that between 2011 and 2014, USAID trained
over 1,400 USAID staff in sound evaluation methods and practices,
created templates and tools to support evaluation design and
performance management plans, and worked with missions to implement an
approach that allows for collaboration with partners and adaptation of
projects based on learning. During that time, over 950 evaluations have
contributed to evidence-based decisionmaking by missions and operating
units.
I also understand that USAID is undertaking an independent
evaluation to examine evaluation utilization across the Agency, which
will provide rich data on trends and practices in evaluation use. This
study is due to be completed in September 2015.
If confirmed, I will focus on this critically important aspect of
USAID programming and ensure that evaluations are used to inform budget
decisions, project design changes, and midcourse corrections in
development programming.
Question. What steps will you take to ensure that these evaluations
are high quality and transparent?
Answer. USAID released an extremely rigorous Evaluation Policy in
2011, which seeks to ensure high-quality and transparent evaluations.
The Evaluation Policy established protocols and procedures for ensuring
that all USAID evaluations are transparently conducted, unbiased,
integrated into project design, relevant for decisionmaking,
methodologically sound, and oriented toward reinforcing local capacity.
It is my understanding that the USAID Evaluation Policy has
institutionalized several additional safeguards to ensure a commitment
to unbiased measurement and reporting, as well as to promote
transparency. For both internal and external evaluations, statements of
work/terms of reference and draft evaluation reports must undergo a
peer review, which is aimed at increasing quality and transparency. In
addition, evaluation team members must submit disclosure of conflict of
interest forms which are part of the final evaluation report. Lastly,
findings from external and internal evaluations must be publicly shared
via the Development Experience Clearinghouse (DEC) online data system.
If confirmed as Administrator, I will ensure continued
implementation of this policy and periodic assessments to verify its
continued effectiveness.
On USAID reforms
Question. As you know, former USAID Administrator Shah initiated
reforms in 2010 under a program called USAID Forward. In your view,
what have been the most lasting results of the USAID Forward reform
effort?
Answer. Although the USAID Forward reform agenda was launched by
former Administrator Rajiv Shah in 2010, I understand that many
elements of what became USAID Forward were proposed at a conference of
career Mission Directors that was conducted with the participation of
senior Agency leadership in November 2009. This early investment in,
and continuing ownership of, the reforms by USAID's senior career
officers is a key ingredient for ensuring the sustainability of these
reforms.
I believe that through USAID Forward's focuses on results,
partnership, and innovation, the Agency has significantly strengthened
its capacity in each of these areas over the past 5 years. USAID now
has in place a rigorous and transparent process for designing
strategies and projects while evaluating their impact to achieve
results in a more focused and selective manner. Its partnership agenda
has grown substantially, almost doubling the amount of direct work with
local partners, as well as significantly increasing its partnership
with the private sector, particularly small businesses. Moreover, USAID
has greatly increased its emphasis on innovative approaches through the
use of science, technology, and open innovation through such platforms
as the Development Innovation Ventures (DIV) and Grand Challenges for
Development, which have been incorporated into the Agency's Global
Development Lab. Each of these reforms under USAID Forward is already
demonstrating a strong, durable impact on USAID's ability to lead the
international community in achieving sustainable results.
Question. What further reforms are needed to make USAID more
effective?
Answer. While I understand USAID has made significant progress as a
result of the reform effort launched in 2010, known as USAID Forward, I
believe that USAID can be more effective if the Agency further
strengthens its Foreign Service, improves transparency when it comes to
results, and bolsters local solutions.
I understand that approximately 50 percent of Foreign Service
officers (FSOs) have less than 5 years of experience with USAID. If
confirmed, I will make it a high priority to invest in the professional
development of new FSOs so they can operate and implement programs
effectively.
Second, USAID Forward and its reforms require staff to partner,
innovate, and deliver results while transparently reporting on foreign
assistance to Congress, the public, and external stakeholders. If
confirmed, I will work to streamline these processes to achieve even
greater effectiveness and continue to strengthen USAID's commitment to
accountability.
Third, if confirmed, I will ensure that USAID continues to invest
in local solutions that achieve sustainable results and build local
capacity and knowledge. USAID must remain committed to creating the
conditions whereby countries can lead, resource, and sustain their own
development.
Question. In your view, does the recently released 2015 Quadrennial
Diplomacy and Development Review (QDDR) support ongoing USAID Forward
reforms?
Answer. Yes. From the outset of the second QDDR process, USAID
focused on advancing and institutionalizing the significant initiatives
and reform efforts already underway, including USAID Forward. The first
QDDR set in motion USAID Forward, a suite of reforms focused on budget
management, policy capacity, implementation and procurement reform,
monitoring and evaluation, innovation, science and technology, as well
as talent management.
The 2015 QDDR emphasizes USAID's commitment to a new way of doing
business that brings partnership, local ownership, innovation, and a
relentless focus on results to enable transformative change. Through
the second QDDR, USAID emphasizes and commits further to building on
partnerships to end extreme poverty, prevent and mitigate conflict,
counter violent extremism, and work with civil society, religious
institutions, and indigenous peoples to promote resilient, open, and
democratic societies.
I understand that additional USAID Forward reforms supported by the
2015 QDDR include building a culture of innovation, leadership, and
learning, as well
as strengthening the ability to assess risks rigorously and
comprehensively to strengthen local systems. The QDDR helps
institutionalize USAID's focus on innovation exemplified by the Global
Development Lab and incorporate these principles into all programming
through work on efficiencies in policy, planning, and learning across
the entire program cycle. The 2015 QDDR also deepens USAID Forward
reforms by bringing greater rigor to evaluations and harnessing data
for decisionmaking.
I am pleased that the QDDR supports ongoing USAID Forward reforms
that are vital to strengthening the Agency and enhancing the
sustainable impact of its work. If confirmed as Administrator, I will
work with the State Department leadership to fully implement the QDDR
recommendations.
On operating in corrupt nations/safeguarding taxpayer dollars
Question. USAID conducts operations in many countries experiencing
instability and conflict as well as countries characterized by corrupt
practices. What are the agency's greatest challenges with regard to
physical security in such countries?
Answer. I understand that USAID has presence in approximately 100
countries and that, in roughly 35 of those, the threat from terrorism
is rated high or critical by the Department of State's Bureau of
Diplomatic Security (DS). I understand that, to supplement the security
provided by DS, USAID's Office of Security (SEC) provides a variety of
security resources to USAID Missions. Primarily, these include
operational security guidance, office building security, armored
vehicles, emergency communications systems, and physical and technical
security countermeasures.
My understanding is that USAID's greatest challenges regarding
physical security are typically the lack of physical setback (distance)
and blast pressure from improvised explosive devices. Diplomatic
facilities are required to have 100 feet of setback, which is difficult
to achieve as most diplomatic facilities are centrally located within
congested capital cities. One of the frequently identified challenges
is the host nation's willingness and capability to protect U.S.
Government resources. I understand that SEC has developed and
implemented several programs to mitigate threats to USAID staff and
implementing partners through Partner Liaison Security Officers (PLSO),
the Personnel Recovery (PR) Program, and Non-Permissive Environment
(NPE) training.
I also understand that the Agency has established an intra-agency
working group to determine ways in which the Agency could operate more
effectively in NPEs. USAID defines an NPE country as having significant
barriers to operating effectively and safely due to one or more of the
following factors: armed conflict to which the United States is a party
or not a party; limited physical access due to distance, disaster,
geography, or nonpresence; restricted political space due to repression
of political activity and expression; and uncontrolled criminality
including corruption. The challenges with regard to physical security
that are faced by officers operating in NPEs vary, but can often
include a high security threat negatively impacting their ability to
partner, implement and monitor projects, as well as high stress on
staff due to the workload and separation from family at unaccompanied
posts.
My understanding is that, as a result of these challenges, the NPE
working group evaluated USAID's presence across the globe and
designated 18 countries as NPE. Officers transitioning to, and out of,
these 18 countries will receive tailored training and support beginning
this summer. Three 3-day courses will be offered to ensure officers
serving in NPEs are better equipped to program, monitor and evaluate
projects, as well as enhance attentiveness to staff care and security
issues. I understand that additional training and field guides are
planned for 2016, contingent upon additional resources.
Question. What steps can USAID take to ensure that U.S. taxpayer
funds are spent as intended in countries where its staff may have
difficulty directly monitoring its programs, such as Afghanistan,
Pakistan, and Libya?
Answer. USAID works in many places around the world where high-
threat environments pose challenges to monitoring and the Agency has
learned important lessons on how to address those challenges. My
understanding is that USAID tailors implementation monitoring plans for
activities implemented in high-threat or nonpermissive environments
like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Libya.
USAID has revised its official policy to address this topic.
Specifically, its policy (ADS 202.3.6.4) on ``Monitoring in High Threat
Environments'' holds USAID staff (Contracting Officer's
Representatives) accountable for ``seeing that the contractors and
grantees they manage are performing adequately and accomplishing the
tasks they set out to achieve.'' It further notes that ``in high threat
environments, USAID recognizes the need to keep mission personnel safe,
as well as the need to visit project sites and meet with beneficiaries
of development assistance.'' To ensure sufficient USAID oversight of
activities, the policy offers alternative monitoring methods such as
requiring photographic evidence; using third-party monitoring;
utilizing other U.S. Government agencies; and applying technological
approaches.
USAID has learned important lessons over the course of its
engagement in Afghanistan, and has drawn on experiences in other
challenging environments--including Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, and
Colombia--to put in place strong oversight of, and accountability for,
U.S. assistance funds. Although there are inherent risks in doing
business in a country like Afghanistan, the Agency prioritizes the
effective and accountable use of taxpayer dollars and does not assume
that there is any level of acceptable fraud, waste, or abuse in our
programs. This means that oversight must be a process of continual
reexamination of ongoing efforts, and that there must be flexibility to
adjust to new circumstances as they arise.
In Afghanistan, USAID has developed a multitiered monitoring
approach to collect and verify data to inform decisionmaking. By
collecting and triangulating information from multiple sources, the
approach helps USAID staff mitigate inherent bias and weaknesses from
any given source. Each Project Manager gathers and analyzes monitoring
data from various sources, compares data to ensure confidence in the
reporting, and use the results to make programmatic decisions. Tiered
monitoring levels are:
Tier 1: USG (USAID and other agencies);
Tier 2: Implementing Partners;
Tier 3: National Unity Government (internal M&E systems,
observation) and other donors;
Tier 4: Civil society, local organizations, and
beneficiaries; and
Tier 5: Independent Monitoring Contractors.
Regarding Tier 5, Independent Monitoring Contractors, the Agency is
incorporating key lessons learned and themes from countries and
programs around the world that have utilized third-party monitoring in
environments in which chief of mission personnel face limitations on
movement, including Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, and West Bank/Gaza.
Independent monitoring, however, is not the sole source of monitoring
data and it cannot take the place of USAID staff as project managers.
Instead, it is one tool that USAID can use to validate reporting data
from other sources. Should USAID determine that its multitiered
monitoring approach cannot provide adequate oversight over project
activities, it will not hesitate to descope or terminate projects.
For Pakistan, my understanding is that USAID has procured a new
monitoring and evaluation program. A core difference from Afghanistan
is that Pakistan relies heavily upon USAID's traditional performance
monitoring and oversight practices. While they maintain the capability
to provide third-party monitors through their recently procurement M&E
support platform, their primary efforts focus on providing strategic
direction to the portfolio through studies and evaluations. The
Pakistan model has components for monitoring, evaluation, and other
analytic products such as targeted assessments, plus learning,
capacity-building, and mapping services. Pakistan applies third party
monitoring in the most difficult regions (FATA) and technically
challenging projects (Infrastructure).
I understand that USAID manages its Libya programs through a
combination of D.C.-based and field-based staff. Foreign Service
National staff play a critical role in overseeing activities and
fulfilling monitoring and evaluation requirements. In addition, USAID
holds regular partners' workshops outside of Libya, in which
implementing partners and interagency counterparts convene to review
progress toward program objectives, suggest programming adjustments
when necessary, and ensure overall program coordination.
Further, as noted in my response to a previous question, I
understand an intra-agency working group has been convened to determine
ways in which the Agency could operate more effectively in
nonpermissive environments (NPEs). USAID defines an ``NPE country'' as
having significant barriers to operating effectively and safely due to
one or more of the following factors: armed conflict to which the U.S.
is a party or not a party; limited physical access due to distance,
disaster, geography, or nonpresence; restricted political space due to
repression of political activity and expression; and uncontrolled
criminality including corruption. The challenges with regard to
monitoring that are faced by officers operating in NPEs vary, but can
often include a high security threat negatively impacting their ability
to conduct site visits.
My understanding is that, as a result of these challenges, the NPE
working group evaluated USAID's presence across the globe and
designated 18 countries as NPE. Officers transitioning to, and out of,
these 18 countries will receive tailored training and support beginning
this summer. Three 3-day courses will be offered to ensure officers
serving in NPEs are better equipped to program, monitor and evaluate
projects, as well as enhance attentiveness to staff care and security
issues. Additional training and field guides are planned for 2016,
contingent upon additional resources.
Question. How should USAID address corruption concerns in recipient
countries?
Answer. Recognizing that corruption is a growing threat to the
national security of the United States and its allies, President Obama
announced the U.S. Global Anticorruption Agenda in 2014. For over two
decades in numerous international fora, the United States has helped
develop a strong global consensus that fighting corruption and
supporting good governance are essential for the development of people,
markets, and nations. It is now globally recognized--as confirmed by
the 173 countries that have joined the United States as signatories of
the United Nations Convention Against Corruption--that corruption
undermines social cohesion, damages economic growth, distorts public
services, weakens the rule of law, and erodes property rights.
If confirmed as Administrator, I will work with USAID leadership to
strengthen our efforts to combat corruption and promote accountable,
democratic governance, which will reduce conditions that allow
conflict, organized crime, and other transnational threats to thrive.
These efforts include adoption of rigorous fiduciary tools to ensure
that funds are being well spent, such as the requirements set out by
the Public Financial Management Risk Assessment Framework (PFMRAF).
This framework helps ensure that USAID only works with partner
governments that are equally committed to accountability and an
empowered civil society. In addition, USAID continues to support long-
term efforts to develop accountable and transparent institutions
through anticorruption programs, which will ultimately contribute to
broad-based, equitable growth.
I am pleased that the Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review
highlighted successful global initiatives, such as the Open Government
Partnership and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, and
if confirmed, I look forward to taking full advantage of our
development resources to promote resilient, democratic societies free
from corruption.
On aid recipient nations
Question. How do we encourage countries to take the lead in their
own development and move them toward graduation from U.S. foreign
assistance programs?
Answer. A core aid effectiveness principle is that every country is
responsible for defining and promoting its own social and economic
development. A second principle is that external donors provide
assistance that supports country ownership and aligns with a country's
development priorities. These aid effectiveness principles were
initially articulated in the 2005 Paris Declaration and have been
reaffirmed by the United States Government and every other major
bilateral and multilateral donor several times since then.
It is my understanding that these aid effectiveness principles are
a key factor in shaping the way that USAID develops its country-level
strategic plans and specific development projects. I understand that an
important part of developing a Country Development Cooperation Strategy
(CDCS) is to consult with the partner government and other local
stakeholders about development priorities and desired results.
USAID's approach also emphasizes the importance of developing the
capacity of local actors and local systems responsible for achieving
and sustaining development outcomes. I understand that the USAID 2014
policy document Local Systems: A Framework for Supporting Sustained
Development, emphasizes this approach for reinforcing local
capabilities to achieve and sustain the developmental benefits desired
by local populations.
A commitment to moving countries toward graduation means that USAID
needs to focus on fewer, higher impact programs and be more selective
about countries and regions to ensure better and more sustainable
results. Ultimately, this approach aims to help prepare countries for
graduation, and ensure that progress is sustained even as assistance is
phased out. If confirmed as Administrator, I will continue to emphasize
focus and selectivity and support for local systems that can take the
lead in local development, and hasten the day when countries can
graduate from foreign assistance.
Question. Would you plan to continue successful efforts that
promote country ownership of their own development?
How would you invest to increase the impact of successful
efforts like the Local Solutions initiative?
Answer. USAID is committed to creating the conditions whereby
countries can lead, resource, and sustain their own development, a
commitment that I share and will prioritize, if confirmed. I agree that
country ownership--mutually agreed-upon priorities, direct
implementation through local systems as the default choice, and
domestic resourcing by local governments, civil society, and the
private sector--should be at the core of how USAID does business. My
understanding is that the Agency is delivering on this commitment
through the following organizational and programmatic reforms, which I
will prioritize if confirmed:
The Agency has put in place policies and a program planning
process that enable it to project results over a longer
timeframe and align its staffing and resources accordingly.
USAID is ensuring that its country strategies and project
designs prioritize and measure sustainability through country
ownership, regardless of the sector. This increasingly entails
broad local stakeholder involvement in the Agency's planning
processes. It also entails analysis (e.g., political economy
analysis) and action (i.e., improved governance) on the
constraints to sustainability, all of which may not be fully in
the Agency's manageable control.
The Agency has put in place the appropriate controls to
prudently invest directly in local governments, civil society,
and bolstering the private sector (as relevant) to ensure that
those stakeholders are accountable, effective, and can sustain
results on their own.
USAID has introduced new guidance and methodologies for monitoring
and evaluating project performance. USAID programs are closely and
actively monitored in-country--including through the use of objective,
third-party evaluations--to track results at every level (input,
output, outcome) and to make room for midcourse correction when changes
are needed. In addition, through the use of rigorous methodologies the
Agency is able to evaluate the impact of its programs and the extent to
which outcomes can be attributed to USAID interventions.
The Agency has almost doubled its Foreign Service staffing to
increase its ability to engage directly with local governments, civil
society, and private sector; negotiate policy reforms; leverage the
local private sector; build capacity; innovate; and manage its
assistance programs.
USAID is promoting the mobilization of local resources in countries
where it works through tax modernization; coinvestments and guarantees
with the local private sector; budding philanthropy; and alternative
business models such as social enterprises and social impact
investment.
Countering violent extremism
Question. The White House summit on Countering Violent Extremism
(CVE) devoted significant energy to community-based efforts to decrease
radicalization and prevent youth and other groups from engaging in
these movements. USAID is one of the only agencies with its own CVE
strategy--dating back to 2011.
What role do you see for USAID in the U.S. Government's
increasing efforts to counter violent extremism?
What kind of policy and resources would the agency need to
be able to meaningfully contribute to a decrease in support for
violent extremism among at-risk populations, particularly
youth?
Answer. The White House Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) Summit
and the regional summits have highlighted the value of USAID's approach
to addressing violent extremism as part of a whole-of-government
response to terrorist threats worldwide. The 2015 Quadrennial Diplomacy
and Development Review (QDDR) also highlights USAID's role in
countering violent extremism. This affirmation and elevation is linked
to the recognition both in the CVE Summit agendas and the QDDR that to
be effective, the response to violent extremism cannot focus just on
security. It also must focus on many of USAID's core areas of work:
education, economic opportunity, good governance, as well as empowering
national and local governments, youth, women, community secular and
religious leaders, civil society, and the private sector.
It is my belief that the United States needs a broad array of tools
in its toolkit to counter violent extremism effectively. A key USAID
role is to focus on the issues that drive people to violent extremism
and address these problems early by disrupting the momentum and
overturning the rationale behind violent extremist recruitment while
reducing local sympathies and support for extremists. These efforts
complement our Nation's ongoing efforts aimed at reducing the terrorist
threat to ourselves and our partners.
I understand that USAID's approach was laid out in its 2011 agency-
level policy, ``The Development Response to Violent Extremism and
Insurgency.'' The policy is drawn from best practices from several
years of CVE programming, as well as from research on the factors that
drive violent extremist recruitment and how development assistance can
help mitigate these root causes. At its core, USAID's CVE approach is
founded upon an understanding of the concerns of vulnerable populations
in areas most at risk to violent extremism, which then allows us to
work with local community organizations and government officials to
address those concerns.
USAID's policy is based upon more than 10 years of experience,
which demonstrates that flexible resources are required to address
violent extremism. USAID's approach has concentrated on youth
empowerment, social and economic inclusion, media and messaging,
improved local governance and in some cases reconciliation and conflict
mitigation. Activities are tailored to meet the specific threat levels,
political environments, and material needs of each community. USAID's
CVE efforts often target distinct populations, for example at-risk
young men, and increasingly recognize the unique role of women in
promoting peace and security. I understand that an evaluation of USAID
programs in Chad, Niger, Mali, and Kenya has helped affirm both the
positive role development tools can play in efforts to address violent
extremism and USAID's approach. It found that these programs have made
a measurable impact among local populations by undermining support for
violent extremist rhetoric and activities.
USAID provides funding for CVE programs out of its current budget
streams, including Economic Support Funds (ESF), Transition
Initiatives, Development Assistance (DA), and ESF/Overseas Contingency
Operations (OCO). In the FY 2016 budget request, the administration
requested $390 million for the Counterterrorism Partnerships Fund
(CTPF), which would create a specific funding stream for CVE programs
to help build on existing efforts. As outlined in the administration's
FY 2016 budget request, having additional funds that can be utilized in
a flexible manner is critical to meaningfully address the local drivers
of extremism and contribute to a decrease in support for violent
extremism among at-risk populations, particularly youth. Reaching
individuals and communities before they are radicalized is a key
component in effectively reducing violent extremism. With the flexible
funds that the administration requested, our assistance programs would
be better positioned to program more effectively in these fragile
communities.
Democracy, rights, governance
Question. As highlighted in the Department of State's 2015
Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, efforts to strengthen
global capacity for good governance and credible elections underpin the
potential impact of all other types of aid (transparent and open
democracies can better respond to pandemics, economic challenges, food
insecurity, gender inequality, and peacekeeping operations).
As USAID Administrator, how would you improve support to
vital democracy and governance programming? I share your
commitment to promoting democracy, human rights and governance
(DRG). I believe that it is central to development, and an
integral part of the U.S. national security strategy.
Answer. USAID recently issued a new strategy on democracy, human
rights, and governance, which codifies a more holistic approach to our
programming in this sector by focusing on participation, inclusion, and
accountability, while elevating human rights and integration of
programming across economic and social sectors.
With respect to funding for these programs, I am pleased that the
President's FY 2016 request includes a 20-percent increase in
democracy, human rights, and governance for USAID. If confirmed, I will
make this area one of my priorities, and I look forward to working with
Congress to ensure appropriate resources are available for this
critical area.
It is important for USAID to be innovative in supporting islands of
reform--pockets of greater participation and accountability--in
countries that have yet to break through in implanting democratic
values, institutions, and processes. It is in these countries that our
efforts in poverty reduction, human rights and democratic governance
need to be further joined and more tightly integrated. Our programs in
health, food security, climate change, economic growth all need to have
components of citizen participation and government accountability.
If confirmed, I will ensure that USAID continues to develop the
evidence base needed to demonstrate successes of these approaches. This
includes improving measurements and evaluating impact as well as
improving practices by conducting cross-sector roundtables; creating
practice guides; and providing funding guidance to the field to enhance
integrated programming.
Microfinance
Question. I understand that the E3 Bureau has been reorganized and
the Office of Microenterprise and Private Enterprise (MPEP) at USAID
has been renamed and refocused on investment.
Is USAID still committed to supporting microfinance and
microenterprise?
Particularly, how will USAID continue to reach vulnerable
groups, including women with support for microenterprise?
Congress has repeatedly encouraged USAID to ensure microfinance
activities target the extreme poor.
With the reorganize of the MPEP office, who will be in charge of
ensuring USAID continues to target those most in need?
If confirmed, as the Administrator, how would you prioritize
microfinance within USAID?
Answer. Microenterprise development has become deeply integrated
throughout USAID's programming and the Agency remains committed to
support microenterprise. I understand that the realignment and renaming
of the Microenterprise and Private Enterprise Promotion (MPEP) Office
in the E3 Bureau is still underway and will have no impact on
microenterprise programing.
I understand USAID has been pivotal in shaping the microfinance
industry, particularly by transforming it into a market-driven model
that attracts private capital, which has dramatically lessened reliance
on donor support and has expanded access to financial services for
millions of poor households in the developing world. It is a prime
example of USAID partnering with the private sector to find market-
driven solutions to end extreme poverty.
It is my understanding that while USAID once developed stand-alone
microenterprise and microfinance projects, these efforts are now
integrated into other USAID programs in order to advance key
initiatives, such as Feed the Future, and PEPFAR. I understand that the
majority of microenterprise activity takes place through USAID Mission-
level obligations, and that during the past year, the vast majority of
USAID Missions reported involvement in microenterprise development.
I understand microfinance is now integrated throughout the Agency
as a means to achieve broader goals, including food security, value
chain development, improved health and nutrition, access to housing,
and enterprise development. If confirmed, I will ensure the reorganized
office will continue these efforts.
The reorganized office must also provide thought leadership for the
Agency on effectively engaging and leveraging private capital for
development? enhance collaboration within USAID and among U.S.
Government agencies and donor partners; and provide advisory support to
USAID Missions and Bureaus. Congress will receive notification of this
realignment before any changes are finalized in the Agency.
If confirmed, I will ensure the office will continue to fulfill all
congressional requirements for Microenterprise programming and ensure
programming targets the extreme poor. I will also ensure that USAID
will have an office for microenterprise development with a Director,
and the Office will continue to oversee an annual data call on
microenterprise obligations, prepare the annual Microenterprise Results
Report, and maintain a help desk to assist partners in the monitoring
of their activities. For FY 2015, I understand that USAID's
Microenterprise Results Report will showcase the continuing role of
USAID's microenterprise and financial inclusion activities as pathways
to ending extreme poverty, increasing food security, and building
resilient households and communities.
Prevention
Question. Of any of our recent Administrators you would have some
of the most valuable experience to share on how to ensure we are
preventing conflicts in Africa and other parts of the world.
How do you envision reforming USAID to better focus on
conflict prevention?
Answer. As the 2015 Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review
(QDDR) makes clear, development plays a critical role in preventing,
mitigating, and responding to threats such as instability, armed
conflict, and the spread of violent extremism in both stable and
fragile countries. Effective conflict prevention and mitigation is
essential to avoid the destructive potential of armed conflict to
reverse development investments.
Since the September 11 attacks in 2001, USAID has worked to develop
a sound capacity for assessing and addressing the causes and
consequences of conflict. I understand that, as the Agency looks
forward to delivering on the vision set by the 2015 National Security
Strategy and the QDDR, it will be mindful about how this capacity will
need to evolve and be strengthened to address new needs and priorities.
I understand that USAID is also seeking opportunities to strengthen
funding for conflict and atrocity prevention through funding streams
such as the Complex Crises Fund and the Transition Initiatives account.
Doing so gives USAID the flexibility to respond quickly in crises and
to devote resources where they can have the greatest impact.
Armed conflicts emerge in fragile states, where long-standing
challenges to legitimacy and effectiveness weaken state institutions
and the relationship of people with their governments. One of the
primary challenges of conflict prevention and mitigation is a long-term
one--tackling the sources of fragility in countries that are vulnerable
to conflict. The approach for upstream conflict prevention works to
build strong, legitimate institutions and political processes in
fragile countries that are capable of managing internal tensions and
transnational threats.
If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that USAID continues to
work with counterpart agencies and departments to implement a framework
for more effective engagement with fragile states. We will work to
ensure that analysis of root causes is applied to decisionmaking
processes, and provide guidance on how to achieve results in these
challenging environments.
If confirmed, I will also support and promote the New Deal for
Engagement in Fragile States. The New Deal, endorsed by the United
States and nearly 40 countries and multilateral organizations in 2011,
establishes peace and state-building goals and action plans, all of
which sets a long-term approach to enable countries' transition out of
conflict. The New Deal focuses on proven areas of need and impact, such
as inclusive politics, enabling effective and equitable service
delivery, reforming security and rule of law sectors, and combating
corruption.
Question. Under your leadership, would the FY 2017 budget better
reflect the importance of conflict prevention and include an increase
in this important type of programming?
Answer. Effective conflict mitigation and prevention requires
policy tailored to each country context, careful program implementation
in close coordination with our partners on the ground, and appropriate
resourcing. While the administration is still formulating the FY17
budget request, I understand that USAID requested modest increases in
FY16 (over FY15 enacted) in some of its core funding accounts.
Specifically, I understand that this includes slight increases in the
Bureau for Democracy, Conflict and Humanitarian Assistance (DCHA) core
funding including for the Complex Crises Fund (CCF), Transition
Initiatives (TI), as well as the Office of Conflict Management and
Mitigation (CMM), USAID's analytic shop that is shaping policy in this
area. CCF, TI, and CMM initiatives will strengthen the response
capacity of country missions to better address conflict, and the Agency
anticipates additional funding (Economic Support Funds, Development
Assistance funds, and other) will be directed toward programming that
mitigates the causes and consequences of conflict.
Given the constrained budget environment, I will, if confirmed,
recognize the need to be prudent and thoughtful in Agency budget
requests. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress to
ensure appropriate resources are available for this critical area.
Resilience
Question. Ms. Smith, you have been a leader in the administration
pushing for better responses to humanitarian emergencies, including
during the food crises in the Horn and the Sahel. We greatly appreciate
the previous Administrator and your support for building the resilience
of communities to withstand shocks and stresses like drought and
conflict.
What will you do as AID Administrator to ensure the
important work on building resilience continues and is
institutionalized within USAID?
Answer. In 2012, USAID launched its first-ever policy and program
guidance on ``Building Resilience to Recurrent Crisis,'' which commits
USAID to put more development focus on the most vulnerable, to build
the adaptive capacity of these populations, and to improve the ability
of communities, countries, and systems to manage and mitigate risk. I
understand that USAID has expanded upon its initial focused resilience
efforts in Ethiopia, Kenya, Niger, and Burkina Faso and that similar
efforts are now underway in Somalia, Uganda, Mali, and Nepal.
If confirmed, I will support the Agency's development of additional
guidance later this year that reflects resilience challenges and
opportunities in Asia. As part of the Country Development Cooperation
Strategy planning processes, the Agency will work to embed resilience
into overall assistance strategies for focus countries in Africa and
Asia, as well as other countries where risk and vulnerability are
prominent threats and undermine development gains. I also commit, if
confirmed, to maintaining the Agency's long-term investments in
resilience in the Horn of Africa and the Sahel.
I understand that USAID's resilience investments are supported by
bureaus and offices across the agency, including Africa Bureau; Asia
Bureau; Bureau for Food Security; Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and
Humanitarian Assistance; Bureau for Global Health; the General Counsel;
and Bureau for Economic Growth, Education, and the Environment. If
confirmed, I commit to sustaining this whole-of-agency effort to build
resilience to recurrent crises.
Tuberculosis
Question. As we saw last year with the Ebola crisis, a disease in a
remote part of the world can quickly become a global problem. Drug
resistant tuberculosis (TB) has been referred to as ``Ebola with
wings.'' Drug resistant TB requires a strong U.S. response since it is
spread simply by coughing, there is no effective vaccine, and the costs
of treating it are enormous. The latest case to grab the headlines, of
a young woman from India with XDR TB (Extensively Drug Resistant TB)
who traveled to the United States, has alarmed the public. USAID's role
is to help countries improve the quality of care and respond to drug
resistance, but, for several years in a row, the Obama administration
has proposed a large cut in USAID's TB budget. The White House has
stated that it is drafting an Action Plan on drug resistant TB.
Will this plan be comprehensive at the scale needed to get
ahead of drug resistant TB?
Under your watch, will USAID's TB program get full support?
Answer. I understand that the White House action plan on drug-
resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) is currently under development and will
build on the current USAID TB portfolio and the Global Fund to Fight
AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria TB grants. This will accelerate progress
toward achieving the goals laid out in the USG TB Strategy and
contribute to the global effort to end the pandemic.
I understand that USAID will be leading the international part of
the plan. It will focus on the development and implementation of faster
and better quality diagnostics and treatment regimens, prioritizing
countries with the highest burdens of drug-resistant TB to maximize
limited resources and end TB as a major cause of morbidity and
mortality. The rollout of new drugs and regimens will be critical to
saving lives and preventing the development and transmission of deadly
drug-resistant TB. I understand the next step in this fast-track
process is a stakeholder forum to ensure input from a wide spectrum of
partners.
I also understand that USAID focuses TB resources through an
evidence-based exercise that determines the best approach for
continuation of TB funds based on burden of TB, drug-resistant TB, TB
coinfection with HIV, and other contributing factors.
Under your watch, will USAID's TB program get full support?
Answer. While I cannot guarantee future funding levels, I will, if
confirmed, help to ensure that USAID continues its efforts to curb the
epidemic by working closely with partners such as the Global Fund for
AIDS, TB and Malaria, ensuring high quality TB programs that
appropriately treat and cure patients of the disease, and prevent the
emergence and spread of drug-resistant strains. I would support USAID's
leadership role in its coordination of U.S. Government global TB
efforts, support for global initiatives, and support to countries to
ensure the further development of quality programs to address TB and
DR-TB using the best tools and treatments available.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator isakson
Question. As you know, Sen. Casey and I introduced the Global Food
Security Act which would formally authorize Feed the Future.
What are the challenges that Feed the Future has currently
and how will you make it stronger in your role as USAID
Administrator?
Answer. First, let me thank you for your support of the Feed the
Future initiative and the New Alliance for Food Security and Nutrition,
which have together elevated food security on the global agenda,
registered direct impact on reducing poverty and improving nutrition,
and mobilized billions of dollars in direct assistance and private
resources. In 2013 alone, Feed the Future reached more than 12.5
million children with nutrition interventions and helped more than 7
million farmers and food producers use new technologies and management
practices on more than 4 million hectares of land.
Among the major challenge we face with respect to Feed the Future
is closing the gender gap in agriculture. Women are the key players in
the agricultural sector, but they own fewer assets and have less access
to inputs (for example, seeds and fertilizer) and services. We have
made considerable progress in this area, thanks in large part to
USAID's development of a Women's Empowerment in Agriculture Index, a
survey-based monitoring tool. If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring
that FTF uses this data to identify the specific impediments to women's
empowerment in agriculture (such as lack of control over productive
assets or access to finance), to develop and implement new programs in
our focus countries that better integrate women farmers into
agricultural value chains, and give them greater access to credit,
inputs, and services.
Question. Part of what we are trying to accomplish with the Global
Food Security Act is to make the strategy and processes behind Feed the
Future more transparent, so that we can more fully understand the
effectiveness of our government's efforts.
In the event that you are confirmed before the passage and
enactment of the bill, will you commit to making the strategy
and process for Feed the Future more transparent?
Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will commit to build upon the
accountability measures in place to make Feed the Future as transparent
as possible. As you may know, this year FTF is conducting population-
based surveys of 17 of its 19 focus countries, which will document our
progress in poverty and child stunting reduction, as well as other
high-level indicators across our geographic implementation zones. In
addition, I understand that USAID is conducting more than 15
independent impact evaluations that help show whether positive
changes--such as increases in farmer income or improvements in
children's nutritional status--are caused specifically by U.S.
assistance. If confirmed, I will ensure the reports and data sets from
these evaluations are made publicly available, along with financial and
annual country performance data. If confirmed, I will ensure that these
data sets are provided to the Congress and made public. In addition, it
is my understanding that in 2016, the Agency will conduct an
independent external evaluation of FTF that will review all aspects of
the initiative. If confirmed, I commit to making the results of this
evaluation public and to instituting any necessary course corrections
to maximize the impact of this critically important work.
__________
administrator-designate smith's responses
to questions from senator paul
Question. In a recent GAO report on foreign aid (GAO-15-377), GAO
recommended that USAID should strengthen accountability for government-
to-government (G2G) assistance. If confirmed, what additional steps
would you take as USAID Administrator to improve the accountability on
this form of aid?
Answer. It is my understanding that USAID has addressed the
concerns raised in the Government Accountability Office (GAO) report
regarding its government-to-government (G2G) assistance. I also
understand that the GAO report commended USAID for completing detailed
risk assessments and for using audits to further identify areas in
which a partner country's public financial management practices could
be strengthened to further ensure capacity to manage USAID funds.
If confirmed, I will ensure that the Agency continues its efforts
to build upon the GAO report and its recommendations to strengthen
accountability for G2G assistance. My understanding is that these
efforts are focused on fully supporting a more efficient and effective
enabling environment for USAID's overall Local Solutions initiative,
including for G2G assistance, and consist of:
Strengthening and simplifying policies, procedures,
templates, and tools to improve accountability;
Improving risk management techniques, procedures and tools
for designing, implementing and monitoring G2G activities;
Providing the needed support and resources to USAID staff
in order to strengthen G2G capacity-building, accountability,
and transparency;
Continuing to improve implementation, timeliness and
monitoring of annual financial audits of G2G funds in
collaboration with USAID's Office of Inspector General and GAO;
and
Enhancing and coordinating development partner
collaboration and harmonization.
Question. The U.S. taxpayers have given billions and billions of
dollars to support aid work in Afghanistan over the last decade, yet
there have been questions on both the accountability and the
effectiveness of this money. For example, the Special Inspector General
for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) recently has called on USAID to
respond to allegations that progress data related to Afghan education
system was falsified.
If confirmed, what are your top three priorities for
improving the accountability and effectiveness for any aid to
Afghanistan?
Answer. Regarding SIGAR's Letter of Inquiry related to data on
education, I understand that USAID's formal response is due by June 30
and USAID will share its response with the committee when submitted.
If confirmed as Administrator, my top three priorities for
enhancing accountability and aid effectiveness in Afghanistan will be:
(1) working to ensure full implementation of the accountability and
sustainability measures already put in place for assistance to
Afghanistan; (2) working to ensure there is a regular review of our
existing accountability and sustainability policies in order to
regularly assess current policies and procedures, develop any new ones
that may be necessary, implement any new ones that are necessary, and
communicate those new policies and procedures internally in the agency
and externally to Congress and others; and (3) working to ensure that
USAID's culture empowers staff to alert leadership to any significant
issues disclosed by the Agency's monitoring of projects in Afghanistan,
or anywhere.
If confirmed, I will support USAID staff to take action when they
identify projects in need of such measures.
USAID has learned important lessons over the course of its
engagement in Afghanistan, and has drawn on experiences in other
challenging environments--including Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Sudan, and
Colombia--to put in place strong oversight of, and accountability for,
U.S. assistance funds. Although there are inherent risks in doing
business in a country like Afghanistan, the Agency prioritizes the
effective and accountable use of taxpayer dollars and does not assume
that there is any level of acceptable fraud, waste, or abuse in our
programs. This means that oversight must be a process of continual
reexamination of ongoing efforts, and that there must be flexibility to
adjust to new circumstances as they arise.
Operationally, USAID has adjusted its implementation model to
improve sustainability and meet the challenges presented by changes on
the ground in Afghanistan, as follows:
Developing a multitiered monitoring strategy to address
reduced mobility and decreased field staff that, along with
other monitoring and evaluation efforts, will continue to
ensure appropriate oversight of projects;
Transforming USAID's approach in Afghanistan to one of
mutual accountability that incentivizes Afghan reforms by
conditioning an increasing percentage of our assistance to the
government on progress on reforms and that continues to
increase government involvement and ownership of development
needs; and
Focusing on long-term sustainability through implementing
three key principles of: (1) increasing Afghan ownership and
capacity; (2) contributing to community stability and public
confidence in the Government of Afghanistan; and (3)
implementing effective and cost-efficient programming.
__________
NOMINATIONS
----------
TUESDAY, JUNE 23, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Glyn Townsend Davies, of the District of Columbia, to be
Ambassador to the Kingdom of Thailand
William A. Heidt, of Pennsylvania, to be Ambassador to the
Kingdom of Cambodia
Jennifer Zimdahl Galt, of Colorado, to be Ambassador to
Mongolia
Atul Keshap, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the Democratic
Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to the Republic of
Maldives
Alaina B. Teplitz of Illinois, to be Ambassador to the Federal
Democratic Republic of Nepal
David Hale, of New Jersey, to be Ambassador to the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan
Sheila Gwaltney, of California, to be Ambassador to the Kyrgyz
Republic
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Cory Gardner,
presiding.
Present: Senators Risch, Gardner [presiding], Cardin,
Shaheen, Murphy, and Kaine.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO
Senator Gardner. This hearing will come to order.
Let me welcome you all to today's full Senate Foreign
Relations Committee hearing on nominations.
I want to thank Senator Cardin for working with this date
and the witnesses today supporting this important hearing
today.
We will have two panels today, the first on nominees from
East Asia and Pacific region, and then at 11 a.m., Senator
Risch will take over for a second panel of nominees from the
South and Central Asia region.
I first want to welcome all the family members who are here
today for this distinguished panel this morning.
In the first panel of witnesses, we will hear from three
nominees: Mr. William Heidt to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of
Cambodia; Mr. Glyn Davies to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of
Thailand; and Ms. Jennifer Galt to be Ambassador to Mongolia.
I had an opportunity to meet personally with all of these
well-qualified nominees, and I want to warmly welcome them and
their families to this hearing today.
Thailand is the longest standing U.S. ally in Asia. The
Kingdom of Siam and the United States concluded a Treaty of
Amity and Commerce in 1833 when our Nation was still in its
infancy.
In 1954, modern day Thailand and the United States became
military allies under the Treaty of Manila, and in 2003, the
United States designated Thailand as a major non-NATO ally.
Despite the historically tumultuous domestic politics in
Thailand, the commercial and military relationship between our
nations has blossomed. The United States is Thailand's third-
largest bilateral trade partner. Our militaries have averaged
40 joint exercises per year. We cooperate actively on issues as
wide-ranging as humanitarian disaster assistance to law
enforcement to disease control.
However, the 2014 military coup in Thailand threatens to
set back the positive trajectory of our relationship unless
Bangkok moves decisively to restore democracy.
So I look forward to hearing from Mr. Davies today on how
we can maintain and grow our strong relationship while exerting
efforts to see Thailand successfully move back to the
democratic path.
Cambodia represents an opportunity for the United States to
build another long-standing partnership in Southeast Asia.
After the unparalleled brutality of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge
regime and the civil war that ensued in the 1970s and the
1980s, Cambodia seems to have finally found a semblance of
stability and a democratic footing.
The July 2013 elections and the 2014 power-sharing
agreement between the ruling Cambodian People's Party and the
main opposition groups, unified as the Cambodian National
Rescue Party, are hopeful steps forward, although progress
remains fragile.
Cambodia is the poorest country in Southeast Asia with GDP
at about $2,600 per person, and the country is heavily
dependent on overseas development assistance, including from
the United States.
So I look forward to hearing from Mr. Heidt on moving the
democratic process forward, but also assisting Cambodia with
its economic and development challenges.
Next but certainly not least, we will move to East Asia and
Mongolia. Sandwiched between two world powers, Russia and
China, Mongolia has major strategic importance for the United
States. Since transitioning from socialism to democracy in
1992, Mongolia has held six direct Presidential elections and
six direct parliamentary elections.
The country possesses vast mineral wealth, although
corruption and economic development remain serious issues in
that country.
Despite the difficult geopolitical environment, Mongolia
has been a strong ally to the United States. Mongolian troops
were part of the coalition during the Iraq war and continue to
serve alongside U.S. troops in Operation Enduring Freedom in
Afghanistan.
So I look forward to hearing from Ms. Galt on how we can
strengthen this critical partnership between our nations.
And now I will turn it over to Senator Cardin for this
hearing.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND
Senator Cardin. Well, Mr. Chairman, first of all, thank you
for holding this hearing so that we can consider these three
nominees.
I want to thank all three of them, as you already have, and
their families. This is an incredible service to our country
that you are willing to perform in a place far away from where
we are today. So we know it is a sacrifice. We know your
families are making those sacrifices, and we thank you for your
willingness to represent the United States in these foreign
policy posts that are strategically important to U.S. security
and economic interests.
Glyn Davies is well known to many members of this committee
for his recent service as the Special Representative for North
Korea Policy, but he has also served as U.S. Representative to
the IAEA and senior positions in the East Asia Bureau and the
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor. This experience
will provide an important background for his service in
Thailand, if confirmed, particularly given recent events there.
William Heidt is currently the executive assistant to the
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the
Environment at the Department of State, a position which will
be invaluable given the economic and development opportunities
we have in Cambodia. Mr. Heidt also has held a senior post in
Warsaw, at the U.N., Indonesia, and in Cambodia. So he brings a
great deal of experience to this position.
And finally, Jennifer Galt, who currently serves as our
counsel general in China. She has been a senior advisor in the
Department of Public Affairs and also served NATO, as well as
previous posts in China and India.
So, Mr. Chairman, we are very fortunate to have three
career diplomats before us who have devoted their professional
life to serve our country. And I thank them again for their
willingness to serve in three important posts in the United
States foreign policy.
You already mentioned Thailand is one of our longest
friendships, 180 years of cooperation in public health, trade,
in security and education. But as you also pointed out, the
recent coups have presented tremendous challenges to Thailand
and its relationship with the United States. The restoration of
democratic governance must be our top priority. And I must tell
you it is taking too long, and we must push for early elections
so that we can move forward with this democratic country.
I also want to point out that it is a Tier 3 country in our
Trafficking In Persons Report and that is unacceptable. So we
need to continue to push Thailand to do the right thing on
behalf of ending modern day slavery.
In Cambodia, they are on a Tier 2 Watch List for
trafficking. That is unacceptable, and they will need our help
again in dealing with this. As you pointed out, it is the
poorest country in the region and has huge challenge, but lots
of potential, potential in economics. The environmental issues
are challenging, but there is a great prospect there. And
certainly expanding their democratic institutions will present
a full array of opportunities for the U.S. mission in Cambodia.
And Mongolia. It is one of the youngest democracies. It has
been supportive of our military operations in Iraq and
Afghanistan and is a country that is the newest member of the
OSCE, an organization where I have devoted a good deal of my
attention.
So I think all three of the posts offer important strategic
partnerships with the United States and a great opportunity,
but also challenge and I look forward to hearing from our
witnesses.
Senator Gardner. Mr. Glyn Davies is a career member of the
Senior Foreign Service and currently serves as senior advisor
in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the
Department of State.
Previously, Mr. Davies served as Special Representative for
North Korea Policy; Permanent Representative to the
International Atomic Energy Agency and the United Nations
Office in Vienna, Austria; Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary
and Deputy Assistant Secretary, East Asia and Pacific Affairs
Bureau; Senior Advisor, Foreign Service Institute Leadership
Management School; Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of
Democracy, Human Rights and Labor; Deputy Assistant Secretary
of the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs; Political
Director for the U.S. Presidency of the G8 with rank of
Ambassador; and Deputy Chief of Mission, U.S. Embassy in
London, United Kingdom.
Mr. Davies earned an M.S. at the National War College in
1995 and a B.S. from Georgetown University in 1979. He has been
the recipient of numerous Senior Foreign Service performance
and honor awards, fluent in French.
Welcome, Mr. Davies and your family. And we look forward to
hearing your comments this morning.
STATEMENT OF HON. GLYN TOWNSEND DAVIES, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF THAILAND
Ambassador Davies. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
committee. Thank you for the chance to appear before you today.
I am honored to be President Obama's nominee to serve as
the United States Ambassador to the Kingdom of Thailand. I
thank both the President and Secretary of State Kerry for their
support.
I also thank all members of the committee for this
opportunity to speak to my qualifications. Throughout my
career, I have worked to develop the experience to lead my
colleagues in strengthening America's security and advancing
its prosperity. If confirmed, serving as chief of mission in
Bangkok would draw on all of my 36 years as a Foreign Service
officer.
My family is my greatest strength. I would like to express
my love and gratitude to my wife, Jackie; daughters, Ashley and
Teddie; son-in-law, Chapin; and granddaughters, Josie and
Cybbie. Josie and Cybbie and my wife and daughter are sitting
behind me today.
Thailand and the United States share a long and a deep
friendship. Thailand is, as you said, our oldest treaty ally in
Asia. We work together to advance regional security, expand
trade, improve public health, assist refugees, counter human
trafficking, illegal narcotics, wildlife trafficking, and
protect the environment. Few bilateral relationships are as
broad and beneficial.
Over the past decade, Thailand's internal political divide
has polarized Thai society. We do not take sides in this, but
we do stress our strong support for democratic principles and
our commitment to our historic friendship with the Thai people.
Since the coup, the United States has publicly and
privately made clear our concerns about the disruption of
Thailand's democratic traditions and the limits placed on civil
liberties, including freedom of expression and peaceful
assembly. Democracy can only emerge when the Thai people freely
and fairly elect their own government. As required by law, the
United States suspended certain assistance until a
democratically elected civilian government takes office. When
that occurs, our relationship can return to its fullest
capacity.
Our call for restoring democracy does not advocate for a
specific constitutional blueprint. That is for Thailand's
people to decide through an inclusive political process. If
confirmed, I will support their democratic aspirations.
Mindful of our long-term strategic interests, we remain
committed to our security alliance. Thai and U.S. troops fought
side by side in both Vietnam and Korea, and together we hold
many bilateral and multilateral exercises, including Asia's
largest, Cobra Gold. These allow us to increase coordination
and cooperation to respond to humanitarian and natural
disasters. We collaborate extensively on public health issues,
including research on a vaccine for HIV/AIDS.
The United States is Thailand's third-largest trading
partner. Our companies are major investors there. Our Embassy
in Bangkok, supported by our consulate general in Chiang Mai,
is a regional hub for the U.S. Government and one of our
largest missions in the world.
Our people-to-people ties are strong. Thousands of Thai and
American students study in each other's countries. The Peace
Corps has been in Thailand for over 50 years. Americans have
long admired and respected Thailand's traditions and culture.
His Majesty King Bhumibol has led his people with compassion
for close to 70 years and has worked tirelessly for their
advancement.
Thailand is a founding member and leading voice in all of
the region's multilateral institutions. We work with Thailand
and through those bodies to advance regional growth and
security.
We also work with government and civil society
organizations to address human trafficking. If confirmed, I
will encourage Thailand to take robust action to combat it.
Thailand has been a key partner on humanitarian issues,
sheltering thousands of Burmese refugees, as well as the
Rohingya and vulnerable populations from some 50 nationalities.
Thailand hosted a regional conference in May on the migrant
crisis in the Andaman Sea and Bay of Bengal. We stress the need
to save lives and treat vulnerable migrants humanely. We also
partner with Thailand to respond to natural disasters such as
the earthquakes in Nepal earlier this year.
We care deeply about Thailand and about its people. If
confirmed, I will work closely with this committee to advance
our broad range of interests in that country. While we will
continue to do much with Thailand, we look forward to its
return to democracy so our joint efforts can reach their
fullest potential. We believe the Kingdom of Thailand can find
reconciliation, establish democracy, and fulfill its historic
destiny as a great and free nation.
Thank you again for considering my nomination, and I look
forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Davies follows:]
Prepared Statement of Glyn Townsend Davies
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored to be President
Obama's nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the Kingdom
of Thailand. I thank the President for the confidence he has placed in
me by putting me forward to the Senate for consideration, and thank
Secretary of State Kerry for his strong support. I am grateful to all
the members of the committee for this chance to speak to my
qualifications and intentions.
I joined the Foreign Service in 1980, and have sought throughout my
career to develop the experience and skills to lead interagency
colleagues in strengthening our country's security and advancing our
prosperity. If confirmed, serving as Chief of Mission in Bangkok would
be the culmination of that 36-year effort.
My family is my greatest strength. I would like to express my love
and gratitude to my wife, Jackie, daughters Ashley and Teddie, son-in-
law, Chapin, and granddaughters, Josie and Cybbie.
Thailand and the United States share a long and enduring
friendship. Thailand is one of our oldest treaty allies in Asia. We
collaborate on a remarkably wide range of issues, including advancing
regional security, expanding trade and investment, enhancing public
health, assisting refugees and displaced persons, countering illegal
narcotics and wildlife trafficking, fighting transnational crime, and
protecting the environment. Despite the limitations we have had to
impose on aspects of our engagement after Thailand's May 2014 military
coup, few bilateral relationships are as broad and yield as many
benefits to both countries.
Over the past decade, Thailand's internal political divide has
dramatically deepened, polarizing not just the political class but
society as a whole. We have not taken sides in this debate, but have
stressed our unwavering support for democratic principles and our
commitment to our historic friendship with the Thai people.
Since the coup, the United States has consistently underscored both
publicly and privately our concerns about the disruption of Thailand's
democratic traditions and accompanying restrictions on civil liberties,
including freedom of expression and peaceful assembly. We maintain that
democracy can only emerge when the Thai people freely and fairly elect
their own representatives and leaders. As required by law, the United
States has suspended certain assistance until a democratically elected
civilian government takes office. When that occurs, our bilateral
relationship can return to its fullest capacity.
Our call for the restoration of civilian government, a return to
democracy, and full respect for human rights, including freedom of
expression and of peaceful assembly, does not mean we advocate for a
specific constitutional or political blueprint. Those are questions for
the Thai people to decide through an inclusive political process that
allows for an open and robust debate about the country's political
future. If confirmed, I will continue to support the democratic
aspirations of the Thai people.
Mindful of our long-term strategic interests, we nonetheless remain
committed to maintaining our security alliance. Thai and U.S. troops
fought side by side during the Vietnam and Korean wars, and together we
hold many bilateral and multilateral exercises, engagements, and
exchanges, including Asia's largest multilateral military gathering,
Cobra Gold. These interactions provide invaluable opportunities to
increase coordination and cooperation, including on providing
humanitarian assistance and responding to natural disasters.
The United States is Thailand's third-largest trading partner, and
American companies are major investors in Thailand. Our Embassy in
Bangkok, supported by our consulate general in Chiang Mai, is a
regional hub for the U.S. Government and remains one of our largest
missions in the world. We collaborate extensively on public health
issues, a cornerstone of our bilateral cooperation, including promising
research on a possible vaccine for HIV/AIDS.
Our people-to-people ties are strong and growing. Educational
linkages help thousands of Thai and American students study in each
other's countries. The Peace Corps has deployed volunteers across
Thailand for over 50 years. The American people have long admired and
respected Thailand's rich traditions and culture. His Majesty King
Bhumibol Adulyadej, the only monarch ever born in the United States,
has led his people with compassion and integrity for almost 70 years
and has been a tireless advocate for the advancement of the Thai
people.
Thailand is a founding member and a leading voice in all of the
region's multilateral institutions, including the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the East Asia Summit, the Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, and the Lower Mekong Initiative
(LMI). The United States will continue to work with Thailand and
through the region's institutions to further our mutual goals of
stimulating trade and economic growth and promoting regional security.
We work with the Thai Government to strengthen its efforts to
address the country's human trafficking problem. We also support civil
society organizations that help identify and protect victims and
promote the rights of migrant workers. If confirmed, I will encourage
Thailand to take robust action to combat human trafficking.
For many years, Thailand has been an important partner on
humanitarian issues. It hosted hundreds of thousands of refugees after
the Vietnam war. Today, Thailand shelters some 110,000 Burmese refugees
and asylum seekers in nine refugee camps along the Thailand-Burma
border, as well as the Rohingya and vulnerable populations from some 50
nationalities. Thailand hosted a regional conference in May on the
migrant crisis in the Andaman Sea and Bay of Bengal. We continue to
work closely with Thailand and other affected countries to address the
sensitive issue of irregular migration with a priority on saving lives
and urging humane treatment of vulnerable migrants. We also work
closely with the Thai to respond to natural disasters, including the
devastating 2008 cyclone in Burma and the earthquakes in Nepal earlier
this year.
We care deeply about our bilateral relationship and about the
people of Thailand. If confirmed, I will work closely with this
committee to advance our broad range of interests in Thailand. While we
will continue to do much together, we look forward to its return to
democracy so that our joint efforts can reach their fullest potential.
We believe the Kingdom of Thailand can find reconciliation, establish
democracy, and fulfill its historic destiny as a great and free nation.
Thank you again for considering my nomination. I look forward to
answering your questions.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Davies.
Mr. Heidt is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service
and currently serves as Executive Assistant, Office of the
Under Secretary for Economic Growth, Energy, and the
Environment in the Department of State. Previously, Mr. Heidt
served the Department of State as Deputy Chief of Mission in
the U.S. Embassy in Warsaw, Poland; Counselor for Economic and
Social Affairs, U.S. Mission to the United Nations in New York;
economic counselor, U.S. Embassy, Jakarta, Indonesia; Special
Assistant, Office of the Under Secretary for Economic,
Business, and Agricultural Affairs; also as finance and
development officer, Embassy Jakarta in Indonesia; and economic
and commercial officer, U.S. Embassy Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
Mr. Heidt earned a B.A. at Pennsylvania State University in
1984 and an M.A. at George Washington University in 1986. His
awards include Department of State Senior Foreign Service
performance, superior honor, and meritorious honor, as well as
joint Department of State and Department of Labor award for
excellence in labor diplomacy. He speaks fluent Cambodian, as
well as Polish, Indonesian, and German.
Welcome, Mr. Heidt, to you, your family and friends.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM A. HEIDT, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE KINGDOM OF CAMBODIA
Mr. Heidt. Thank you very much, Chairman Gardner, Ranking
Member Cardin, and Senator Kaine.
It is an honor and a privilege to appear before you today
as the President's nominee to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of
Cambodia. I am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary
Kerry for the confidence and trust they have placed in me by
nominating me for this position. If confirmed, I pledge to work
closely with this committee to advance the United States broad
range of interests in a peaceful, democratic, and prosperous
Cambodia.
I am accompanied today by my wife, Sotie, and son, Allen,
who are sitting right behind me to my right, and who have
served overseas tours with me in hot cities and cold ones too,
ranging from Cambodia, Indonesia, Poland, and New York City.
I have spent the bulk of my 28-year Foreign Service career
working on the interlinked challenges of promoting America's
prosperity overseas and helping developing countries enact the
policies and build the institutions they need to improve living
standards, protect the environment, and compete in a global
economy.
One of my most memorable Foreign Service tours was in Phnom
Penh from 1997 to 1999 where I worked on a number of the most
critical issues facing the country, including illegal logging,
food security, and building a sustainable garment industry with
decent and dignified conditions of work.
Cambodia has changed dramatically since that time. GDP
growth has exceeded 7 percent annually for the past decade, and
as a result, the national poverty rate has fallen from well
over 50 percent in 2000 to 17 percent in 2012. Life expectancy
has increased substantially as well. If confirmed, I plan to
make growing the trade and investment relationship between the
United States and Cambodia a top priority.
Cambodia's performance on human rights and democracy issues
has been more uneven. The most recent national elections in
2013 drew unprecedented public involvement but were also marred
by allegations of fraud. After a yearlong post-election
standoff, the ruling party and opposition reached agreements on
power-sharing in the National Assembly and reforming the
country's election law and National Election Committee.
But despite these negotiated agreements, concerns remain
about provisions that appear to limit the activities of NGOs in
the democracy area and that open the door for increased
influence by the Cambodian military and other government
officials in election campaigns. If confirmed, I will make it a
priority to work with the government, opposition, and civil
society to strengthen Cambodia's democratic institutions.
The building of a vibrant, homegrown civil society is one
of Cambodia's most impressive achievements since the 1993 Paris
Peace Accords, but NGOs in Cambodia today face deep uncertainty
in the form of a draft law on associations and nongovernmental
organizations that is soon to be considered in the National
Assembly. Provisions in this draft law would appear to limit
the activities NGOs may engage in and create burdensome
registration and reporting requirements for them. The United
States has spoken about these concerns and the lack of public
consultations to date on the law. If confirmed, I will work
closely with civil society and the government to encourage the
creation of stable and supportive conditions for a vibrant
civil society in Cambodia.
Cambodia has also made progress in recent years on several
crucial humanitarian and justice issues. With assistance from
the United States Government and a number of NGOs, Cambodia has
made great strides in reducing child sex trafficking, one of
the saddest and most pernicious social problems the country has
faced. The State Department and USAID continue to work with
Cambodia to reduce labor trafficking, which remains a
significant problem in Cambodia and its neighbors.
The United States supports the work of the Khmer Rouge
Tribunal to help the people of Cambodia find justice and hold
accountable those most responsible for the atrocities committed
by the Khmer Rouge. If confirmed, I will work with fellow
tribunal supporters and the Cambodian Government to ensure that
the tribunal completes its critical mission.
The United States supports Cambodia's reemergence on the
world diplomatic stage and has encouraged it to play an
independent, principled role in ASEAN and other regional
institutions. We have supported Cambodia's integration into the
ASEAN Economic Community and collaborated with it in the Young
Southeast Asian Leaders Initiative, or YSEALI. Through YSEALI,
the United States is engaging young Southeast Asians and
encouraging them to view their country's goals and challenges
in a regional context. The program has been enormously popular
in Cambodia, and if confirmed, I will make youth engagement a
top priority.
Mr. Chairman, it is fitting to conclude with a few words
about Cambodia's young people. It is one of the youngest
nations in Southeast Asia, with 70 percent of the population
under the age of 30. Young Cambodians today are very favorably
disposed toward the United States. Like young people
everywhere, they want good jobs, a chance to engage in the
political and social life of their country, and the opportunity
to build a family. They are one of the main reasons I am
optimistic about the country's future today.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to appear
before the committee today. I would, of course, be happy to
answer any questions you might have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Heidt follows:]
Prepared Statement of William A. Heidt
Chairman Gardner, Ranking Member Cardin, and members of the
committee, it is an honor and privilege to appear before you today as
the President's nominee to be Ambassador to the Kingdom of Cambodia. I
am deeply grateful to President Obama and Secretary Kerry for the
confidence and trust they have placed in me by nominating me for this
position. If confirmed, I pledge to work closely with this committee to
advance the United States broad range of interests in a peaceful,
democratic, and prosperous Cambodia.
I am accompanied today by my wife, Sotie, and son, Allen, who have
served overseas tours with me in Cambodia, Indonesia, and Poland.
I have spent the bulk of my 28-year Foreign Service career working
on the interlinked challenges of promoting America's prosperity around
the world and helping developing countries enact the policies and build
the institutions they need to, improve living standards for all,
protect the environment, and compete in the global economy.
One of my most memorable Foreign Service tours was in Phnom Penh,
from 1997-99, where I worked on some of the most critical issues facing
Cambodia--controlling rampant illegal logging, feeding the 10-percent
of the country who went hungry every dry season, and helping the
Cambodian Government build a sustainable garment industry with decent
and dignified conditions of work. I am proud that in 2000, after my
return from Phnom Penh, I was awarded the joint Department of State--
Department of Labor award for labor diplomacy for my work strengthening
workers' rights in Cambodia's garment sector.
Cambodia has changed significantly since that time. Cambodia's GDP
has grown more than 7 percent annually for the past decade on the
strength of increased agricultural production, a booming tourism
industry, investment in real estate and construction, and growth in
garment exports. As a result, the poverty rate fell from well over 50
percent in 2000 to just over 17 percent in 2012, and is surely lower
today. Life expectancy has increased from 67 years in 2006 to 71.2
years in 2013, due to improved food security and health care. If
confirmed, I plan to make growing the trade and investment relationship
between the U.S. and Cambodia a priority. I also hope to advance our
cooperation on health issues, which make a direct impact on the
Cambodian people.
Cambodia's performance on human rights and democracy issues has
been more uneven than its economic progress. The most recent national
elections in 2013 drew unprecedented public involvement and were the
most peaceful in Cambodian history but were also marred by allegations
of fraud. After a year-long, post-election standoff, the ruling party
and opposition reached an agreements on power sharing in the National
Assembly and to reform the country's election law as well as Cambodia's
National Election Committee, which oversees elections.
But despite these negotiated agreements, concerns remain, including
with regard to provisions that appear to limit the activities of
nongovernmental organizations in the democracy area and open the door
for increased influence by the Cambodian military and other government
officials in election campaigns. The United States has a long history
of supporting Cambodia's democratic development through foreign
assistance funding and people-to-people contacts. If confirmed, I will
make it a priority to work with the government, opposition, and civil
society to strengthen Cambodia's democratic institutions and raise the
level of public confidence in them. Conducting free and fair communal
elections in 2017, and national elections in 2018, will be a key test
for the Government.
The building of a vibrant, home grown civil society is one of
Cambodia's most impressive achievements since the 1993 Paris Peace
Accords ended years of conflict. Cambodian and international NGOs
deliver crucial social services, educate the public on issues ranging
from health to information technology, build people-to-people contacts
with countries around the world, and develop the skills of thousands of
Cambodian workers. It is no exaggeration to say that NGOs are one of
Cambodia's finest faces to the world.
But NGOs in Cambodia today face deep uncertainty in the form of a
draft Law on Associations and Non-Governmental Organizations that is
soon to be considered in the National Assembly. Provisions in this
draft law would appear to limit, in vague terms, the activities NGOs
may engage in, and create burdensome registration and reporting
requirements for NGOs. The United States has spoken about these
concerns, the lack of public consultations to date on the law, and the
law's overall intent. If confirmed, I will work closely with civil
society and the Government to encourage the creation of stable, and
supportive conditions for a vibrant civil society in Cambodia.
Cambodia has also made progress in recent years on several crucial
humanitarian and justice issues. With assistance from the U.S.
Government and a number of NGOs, Cambodia has made great strides in
reducing child sex trafficking--one of saddest, and most pernicious
social problems the country has faced. The State Department and USAID
continue to work with Cambodia to reduce labor trafficking, which
remains a significant problem in both Cambodia and neighboring
countries. The United States supports the work of the Khmer Rouge
Tribunal to help the people of Cambodia find justice and hold
accountable those most responsible for the atrocities committed by the
Khmer Rouge. We will continue to work with fellow Tribunal supporters
and the Cambodian Government to ensure the Tribunal completes its
critical mission. And as one of the few Asian countries that is party
to the Refugee Convention, Cambodia has made important progress in
developing procedures to identify and protect refugees. At the same
time, if confirmed, I will strongly urge it to apply those protections
to people seeking asylum on its territory, including the Montagnards
from Vietnam.
Cambodia is playing an increasingly active role in the Southeast
Asia region. The United States supports Cambodia's reemergence on the
world diplomatic stage, and has encouraged it to play an independent,
principled role in ASEAN and other regional institutions. We have
supported Cambodia's integration into the ASEAN Economic Community and
collaborated with Cambodia in the Young Southeast Asian Leaders
Initiative or YSEALI. Through YSEALI, the United States is engaging
with the 65 percent of Southeast Asians under the age of 35 and
encouraging them to view their countries' goals and challenges in a
regional context. The program has been enormously popular in Cambodia,
and if confirmed, I will make youth engagement a priority.
Mr. Chairman, it is fitting to conclude my testimony with a few
words about Cambodia's young people. Cambodia is one of youngest
nations in Southeast Asia with 70 percent of the population under 35.
Most Cambodians were not even born during the brutal Khmer Rouge period
and years of civil war, events that continue to define our perceptions
of Cambodia. Young Cambodians today are very favorably disposed toward
the United States, and like young people everywhere, want good jobs, a
chance to engage in the political and social life of their country, and
the opportunity to build a family. They are one of the main reasons I
am optimistic about the country's future.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before
you. I would be happy to answer any questions the committee might have.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Heidt.
And finally, let me extend a special welcome to a fellow
Coloradan, Ms. Jennifer Zimdahl Galt, our nominee for Mongolia.
Ms. Galt is a proud graduate of Colorado College in Colorado
Springs, and her father is a professor emeritus at my alma
mater of Colorado State University.
Ms. Galt is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service,
class of minister counselor, currently serves as principal
officer at the U.S. consulate general in Guangzhou, China, a
position she has held since 2012.
Previously, Ms. Galt served in the Department of State as
Senior Advisor in the Bureau of Public Affairs from 2011 to
2012; Public Affairs Advisor at the U.S. Mission to the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization in Brussels, Belgium; and Deputy
Director, Office of Public Diplomacy, Bureau of East Asian and
Pacific Affairs from 2008 to 2010. She also served as public
affairs officer, U.S. consulate general, Shanghai in China;
assistant cultural affairs officer, U.S. Embassy in Beijing;
assistant public affairs officer, U.S. consulate in Mumbai; and
information officer, American Institute in Taiwan.
Ms. Galt earned a bachelors of the arts, as I mentioned,
from Colorado College; M.A. from Johns Hopkins University
School of Advanced International Studies; and an M.S. from the
National Defense University.
She has won numerous awards from both the Department of
State and earlier from the United States Information Agency.
She speaks Mandarin Chinese, French, Italian, Spanish, and
Serbo-Croatian.
Welcome, Ms. Galt. I look forward to your comments today.
STATEMENT OF JENNIFER ZIMDAHL GALT, NOMINATED
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO MONGOLIA
Ms. Galt. Thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, Senator Kaine, 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 Kerry 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.
My career in the Foreign Service spans 27 years, most of
them spent in Asia. I joined the Foreign Service out of a
commitment to serve my country and have consistently sought
assignments where I felt I could make a difference and
contribute to advancing an important relationship.
The love and support of my family has sustained me
throughout. I would like to take this opportunity to express my
gratitude to my husband, Fritz, and my children, Phoebe and
Dylan, who have traveled the globe with me, and to my father,
Bob Zimdahl, and my brothers, Randy, Bob, and Tom. I am
enormously proud that my daughter Phoebe, a rising college
junior, is here with me today.
This is an exciting year for United States-Mongolia
relations, as we mark the 25th anniversary of Mongolia's
decision for democracy, a milestone that the Senate recognized
in its June 1 resolution. Our partnership has grown stronger
since then-Secretary Baker first visited the newly democratic
Mongolia in 1990. As the only former Soviet satellite in East
Asia to choose democracy, Mongolia is an important model in the
region and, as the saying goes, punches above its weight on
issues of strategic interest to the United States, including
coalition military efforts, peacekeeping, and the promotion of
democratic principles and values. Our relationship is one of
shared interests and is characterized by enormous potential.
There are many opportunities for the United States to
deepen our partnership with Mongolia. I would like to highlight
a few where I would focus my attention, should I be confirmed
as Ambassador.
Mongolia and the United States share a common interest in
promoting peace and stability. Mongolia is a stalwart partner
in Afghanistan and deploys capable peacekeepers wherever they
are needed, including currently in Sudan and South Sudan. Just
last week, the United States and Mongolia conducted our yearly
multinational peacekeeping exercise, Khaan Quest. Mongolia
demonstrates leadership in international fora to promote
democracy and human rights, such as the Freedom Online
Coalition and the Community of Democracies. Mongolia is a model
of democracy and has demonstrated a willingness to mentor
others in the region, offering training and exchanges with
leaders from Burma to Kyrgyzstan. If confirmed, I would welcome
the opportunity to work with Mongolian officials to advance our
shared interests in these critical areas.
Recent high-level engagement in Mongolia has demonstrated
our commitment to enhancing commercial opportunities for U.S.
companies. In the last 6 months, we resumed trade and
investment framework agreement talks, launched a new economic
policy dialogue, and the Millennium Challenge Corporation began
the process of developing a second compact with Mongolia. Each
of these initiatives is an opportunity to expand economic
growth, model responsible business conduct, promote trade and
investment, and create opportunities for U.S. companies. The
Mongolian Government demonstrated its interest in attracting
foreign investment by signing and ratifying the U.S.-Mongolia
Transparency Agreement in December 2014. The Mongolian Prime
Minister is traveling to Washington and New York this week to
deliver the message that Mongolia is open for business, our
business.
Mongolia's recent progress on a major copper and gold mine
with a Western company signaled to the international community
its renewed seriousness of purpose in attracting foreign direct
investment. With large reserves of coal, copper, gold, uranium,
and other minerals, there are many opportunities for U.S.
companies in mining and related sectors. If confirmed, I would
support these opportunities by actively informing potential
U.S. investors about the investment climate and advocating on
their behalf.
I believe that two key components of U.S. support for
Mongolia's democracy and its independence and leadership in the
region are engagement with its nascent civil society and
deepening people-to-people ties. If confirmed, I would continue
the work of my predecessors in areas such as the rights of
persons with disabilities. I would, if confirmed, continue our
robust subnational cooperation as well, including the Alaska-
Mongolia State Partnership and the sister city relationship
between Ulaanbaatar and Denver in my home State of Colorado. If
confirmed, I would also look forward to supporting one of our
largest Peace Corps programs anywhere, with over 150 volunteers
in country. Peace Corps Volunteers work side by side with
Mongolians in English teaching, health care, and community
youth development.
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it would be the
highest honor for me to serve our country as Ambassador to
Mongolia. If confirmed, I will do my utmost to ensure that the
United States delivers on the strategic and historic
opportunities of the next century of Mongolia's democracy.
Thank you for considering my nomination, and I look forward
to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Galt follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jennifer Zimdahl Galt
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, 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 Kerry have shown in me, and, if confirmed,
I look forward to working closely with the Senate to build on the
already strong ties between the United States and Mongolia.
My career in the Foreign Service spans 27 years, most of them spent
in Asia. I joined the Foreign Service out of a commitment to serve my
country and have consistently sought assignments where I felt I could
make a difference and where I could contribute to advancing an
important relationship. My career has taken me to the former
Yugoslavia, Taiwan, India, the U.S. Mission to NATO, and, multiple
times, to China.
The love and support of my family has sustained me throughout. I
would like to take this opportunity to express my gratitude to my
husband, Fritz, and my children Phoebe and Dylan, who have traveled the
globe with me, and to my father, Bob Zimdahl, and my brothers Randy,
Bob, and Tom. My father, in particular, has demonstrated his support by
visiting us at every overseas post. I am enormously proud that my
daughter, Phoebe, a rising college junior, is here with me today.
This is an exciting year for U.S.-Mongolia relations, as we mark
the 25th anniversary of Mongolia's decision for democracy, a milestone
that the Senate recognized in its June 1 resolution. Our partnership
has grown stronger since then-Secretary Baker first visited the newly
democratic Mongolia in 1990. As the only former Soviet satellite in
East Asia to choose democracy, Mongolia is an important model in the
region and, as the saying goes, punches above its weight on issues of
strategic interest to the United States, including coalition military
efforts, peacekeeping, and the promotion of democratic principles and
values. Our relationship is one of shared interests and is
characterized by enormous potential.
There are many opportunities for the United States to deepen our
partnership with Mongolia. I would like to highlight a few areas where
I would focus my attention, should I be confirmed as Ambassador.
Sustaining our strong partnership across sectors: Mongolia and the
United States share a common interest in promoting peace and stability.
Mongolia is a stalwart partner in Afghanistan, and deploys capable
peacekeepers wherever they are needed, including currently in Sudan and
South Sudan. In April 2014, the United States and Mongolia signed a
Joint Vision Statement that articulated the parameters for our security
relationship, acknowledging the important role Mongolia plays as a
stabilizing influence in Asia and commending Mongolia's support for
U.N. peacekeeping operations around the world. Just last week, the U.S.
and Mongolia conducted our yearly multinational peacekeeping exercise,
Khaan Quest. Mongolia demonstrates leadership in international fora to
promote democracy and human rights, such as the Freedom Online
Coalition, hosting a successful annual conference in May; and the
Community of Democracies, hosting the Ministerial in 2013. Mongolia is
a model of democracy and has demonstrated a willingness to mentor
others in the region, offering training and exchanges with leaders from
Burma to Kyrgyzstan. If confirmed, I would welcome the opportunity to
work with Mongolian officials to advance our shared interests in these
critical areas.
Strengthening economic ties and creating opportunities for U.S.
businesses: Recent high level engagements in Mongolia have demonstrated
our commitment to enhancing commercial opportunities for U.S.
companies. In the last 6 months, we resumed Trade and Investment
Framework Agreement talks, launched a new Economic Policy Dialogue, and
the Millennium Challenge Corporation began the process of developing a
second compact with Mongolia. Each of these initiatives is an
opportunity to expand economic growth, model responsible business
conduct, promote trade and investment, and to create opportunities for
U.S. companies. Mongolia Government demonstrated its interest in
attracting foreign investment by signing and ratifying the U.S.-
Mongolia Agreement on Transparency in Matters Related to International
Trade and Investment (the Transparency Agreement) in December 2014. The
Mongolian Prime Minister is traveling to Washington and New York this
week to deliver the message to U.S. companies and Members of Congress
that Mongolia is open for business, our business.
Mongolia's recent progress on a major copper and gold mine with a
Western company signaled to the international community its renewed
seriousness of purpose in attracting foreign direct investment, which
has declined 85 percent since 2012. With large reserves of coal,
copper, gold, uranium, and other minerals, there are many opportunities
for U.S. companies in mining and related sectors. If confirmed, I would
support these opportunities by actively informing potential U.S.
investors about the investment climate and advocating on their behalf.
I would also continue our efforts to promote a more diversified economy
in Mongolia and to generate increased commercial opportunities for U.S.
companies, including support for Department of Commerce efforts such as
the U.S.-Mongolia Business Forum, which this year will focus on
agriculture. I would encourage good governance, transparency, and
responsible business conduct, including through working with the
Mongolian Government to implement the Transparency Agreement.
Enhancing civil society and people-to-people ties with Mongolia: I
believe that two key components of U.S. support for Mongolia's
democracy and its independence and leadership in the region are
engagement with its nascent civil society and deepening people-to-
people ties. If confirmed, I would continue the work of my predecessors
in areas such as the rights of persons with disabilities, where, thanks
to exchanges between government leaders and civil society, we are
working with Mongolian parliamentarians on draft legislation that may
include lessons learned from our Americans with Disabilities Act. I
would, if confirmed, continue our robust subnational cooperation as
well, including the Alaska-Mongolia State Partnership, which began with
cooperation between the Alaska National Guard and the Mongolian Armed
Forces, and has grown to include economic and social ties. I am
particularly pleased that Mongolia's ties to the United States also
include a sister city relationship between Ulaanbaatar and Denver, in
my home State of Colorado. If confirmed, I also would look forward to
supporting one of our largest Peace Corps programs anywhere, with over
150 volunteers in country this year. Peace Corps volunteers work side
by side with Mongolians in English teaching, health care, and community
youth development. The efforts of these volunteers--our grassroots
ambassadors in Mongolia--have been extremely effective.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it would be the highest
honor for me to serve our country as Ambassador to Mongolia.
America's security and prosperity are closely and increasingly
linked to the Asia-Pacific. One of the most important tasks of American
statecraft over the next decade is to lock in the increased
investment--diplomatic, economic, strategic, and military--from the
administration's sustained rebalance to the region. I welcome the
opportunity to be on the front lines of this endeavor. If confirmed, I
will lead a diplomatic mission of approximately 200 U.S. and Mongolian
employees, representing five 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 engage on behalf of the
United States, so that Americans continue to sustain and benefit from
the growth and dynamism in the Asian region. If confirmed, I will also
do my utmost to ensure that the United States delivers on the strategic
and historic opportunities of the next century of Mongolia's democracy.
Thank you for considering my nomination. I look forward to your
questions.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Ms. Galt, and thanks to all of
you again for your comments this morning.
And since I cannot just talk to you the entire time about
Colorado, we will have to spread out the conversation a little
bit.
Mr. Davies, 38 years in the Foreign Service, your
experience. Thank you for your commitment. What is the biggest
change that you have seen over that time, starting from your
first experiences to today in terms of public diplomacy?
Ambassador Davies. In terms of public diplomacy, I think
the explosion in--let us call it--the globalization of media
has been the biggest change. When I came into the Foreign
Service, the United States of America was reaching hearts and
minds overseas in very traditional ways, publishing millions of
copies of magazines for young Indians every month, for
instance, using radio, touring music stars, and so forth.
Today, we can reach young people in most countries in their
shirt pockets through their mobile devices, and it requires a
much more considered approach to how we get the word out to
peoples all around the world, in particular young people, about
America, what it stands for, and why it is that they should
look to the United States as a friend and ally. So the
challenge has become much more complex. But I think we are
making the changes necessary to step up.
Senator Gardner. And specifically to Thailand, in terms of
the length of the military coup, do we have any idea how long
we are looking at this lasting, this military exertion of
power? Is there a way that the United States can influence the
length of that or the timing or speed up the reforms for
democracy, free elections, and sort of adding a third component
to that with the support and loyalists to the former Prime
Minister, is it even possible to have free and fair elections
in Thailand?
Ambassador Davies. Well, I believe that it is possible for
Thailand to have free and fair elections. They have done it in
the past. In recent generations, they have had decades' worth
of experience of democracy. They can get back to that. The
current junta, the coup government, claims that that is their
aspiration. They have set up a very lengthy, somewhat elaborate
process to get back to it. You are right. The goal post does
continue to recede. That is a big concern. We want them to get
back to democracy as soon as possible. We would like to see
elections very soon.
But at the end of the day, the truth is this is up to
Thailand, its leadership, and its people to work out. But I
have confidence they can do it. And if confirmed, I am going to
bend every effort to convey to them the views of the United
States and would encourage them to get back on that democratic
path.
Senator Gardner. Thank you.
Mr. Heidt, Hun Sen has ruled Cambodia since the mid-1990s
basically without interruption. What do you see as Cambodia's
likely political future, should Hun Sen move toward retirement?
Are there scenarios where there could be military interference
if there is a retirement there as well? What do you do in such
a scenario?
Mr. Heidt. Thank you for the question, Senator.
There has been a lot of stasis at the top of Cambodia's
ruling elite in the last 20 years. Of course, in 2013, we had a
very good and meaningful election for Cambodia. It was the most
open election in Cambodian history. Public participation was
very broad, very enthusiastic. The opposition party did much
better than anyone expected and even despite some pretty deep-
seated irregularities in the election process.
So it left many observers with the feeling that with a
reformed National Election Commission and some additional
support from the international community, Cambodia can take
another step forward in the next election just as they took a
step forward in 2013. So there is optimism that with continued
support, we could see a better democratic future for Cambodia.
I do not deny, of course, that there are also concerns
about increased military--the possibility under the new law for
increased military activity in the campaign. That law does
permit, for the first time in Cambodia, the military and senior
government officials to be involved. And that is a concern and
it is something we are going to have to monitor very closely.
If confirmed, I hope to do that.
Senator Gardner. You mentioned the opposition party. How is
the power-sharing arrangement working between the two parties,
the CPP, the CNRP?
Mr. Heidt. Senator, that is a $64,000 question with respect
right now to Cambodia. Both the Prime Minister and Sam Rainsy--
they have both spoken publicly about their desire to start this
culture of dialogue. The relationship is clearly more
cooperative than at any time in the 20 years since I have been
following Cambodia. Of course, as a general rule, we encourage
dialogue in Cambodia. We think that is very important to have
constructive dialogue, peaceful dialogue that can help Cambodia
put forward the reforms and policy changes they need to improve
the lives of ordinary Cambodians. Whether this new
collaboration between the two will lead to that kind of genuine
change, I think it is much too early to say, very honestly, and
I think it is something that if confirmed--it is definitely
something we are going to keep a very close eye on.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Heidt.
Ms. Galt, in your opening remarks, you talked about
Mongolia being the only former Soviet satellite state that had
moved or transitioned toward democracy. Yet, in preparing for
this morning's hearing, the background briefings on Mongolia--
the corruption challenges to--corruption at the local level
throughout the government. Yet, we have had six Presidential
elections, open elections there. What more can the United
States do to address the full transition to a democracy,
reducing corruption, but strengthening and building democracy?
Ms. Galt. Thank you, Senator, for your question.
Indeed, Mongolia is a democracy but it is a young
democracy, and it shares many of the same challenges as other
young democracies in terms of solidifying the rule of law.
And I think there are two areas where we can continue our
work with Mongolia--and if confirmed, I would look forward to
doing that--to solidify and strengthen some of their
institutions to combat corruption.
One is to support Mongolia's leadership in international
fora to promote democracy. Mongolia has shown a willingness to
reach beyond its borders, to export both democracy and
security. And we continue to work with Mongolia to strengthen
its own institutions. And recently our increased economic
engagement is very important in that regard. So with its
signing of the U.S.-Mongolia Transparency Agreement, Mongolia
has indicated its willingness to improve its own institutions
to combat corruption and to combat transnational crime as well.
Our Trade and Investment Framework Agreement talks and our new
Economic Policy Dialogue gives us other platforms to talk about
institutional reforms.
The Millennium Challenge Corporation is another tool that
we can use to enhance Mongolia's democratic behavior. MCC
leadership tells me that based on the successful completion of
their first compact, they believe very strongly that Mongolia
has learned many lessons from working with us on the first
compact. And, if confirmed, I would look forward to working
with Mongolia and working with the Millennium Challenge as they
develop a second compact for Mongolia.
Senator Gardner. Thank you, Ms. Galt.
Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Once again, thanks to our witnesses.
In each of your countries, I think to a large extent the
success of our mission depends upon us standing strong on the
principles of our country, the universal principles that we
espouse on human rights, good governance, anticorruption,
rights of all individuals. That to me is the bedrock of
America's foreign policy. And we have seen too many places in
the world where we have deviated from that commitment. The
stability that we hoped for did not exist and will not exist.
So in all three of the countries, there are challenges in
trafficking in persons. Thailand is probably the worst. It is a
Tier 3 country, which means that it has failed. There are
reportedly tens of thousands of victims in Thailand, mainly
from other countries, that have been trafficked into Thailand
for labor abuse and for sex trafficking. Obviously, that cannot
continue.
It is more of a challenge because in Thailand we are now
past the 1-year anniversary of this coup, and it was not the
first coup in modern history. And I must tell you my patience
is running thin with Thailand. We talk about a commitment to
early elections, and when a country is operating under a coup
government, human rights are always going to be challenged, as
we have seen.
So, Mr. Davies, I appreciate your view that we cannot
intercede into the internal politics of a country, and I agree
with that. But for the sake of the rights of the people of
Thailand and for U.S. principles, there must be an urgency in
Thailand proceeding with democratic elections and dealing with
its human rights issues.
Your comments?
Ambassador Davies. Thank you very much, Senator. I think
that is exactly right, and I think that is job one for anyone
who represents the United States in Thailand to bring home to,
in particular, the current leadership the importance of moving
quickly, swiftly, allowing for, if need be catalyzing an open,
inclusive public debate about the way forward for Thailand. I
believe most Thais do want to get back to democracy. The
situation now is untenable. It is not good for Thailand, first
and foremost, to have a suspension of civil liberties, of
sending civilians through the military justice system, and so
forth.
So for me, if confirmed, this would be something I would
lean into very hard to convey publicly and privately the
importance we attach to Thailand's getting back to the
democratic path, breaking this cycle of periodic military coups
that, quite frankly, goes all the way back three generations to
the 1930s, and putting Thailand once and for all firmly and
finally on the path to democracy.
So I take your words to heart. I want to work with this
committee to see this through. I do think it is not a job that
is going to be done in an instant because they are a divided
society, divided polity. There are serious issues that have to
be worked out domestically, which is why I said it really is,
first and foremost, their challenge to confront. But I think
you are right. We have a role to play. They listen to us. We
are going to use that bully pulpit.
Senator Cardin. I thank you for your answer. We recognize
it will not happen overnight. But it is already over a year
since this coup, and I think many of us expected further
progress than we have seen to date. So there is an urgency
here. I just hope that you will transmit that to the people of
Thailand that we are with them, but we will not tolerate the
suspension of civil liberties.
Ambassador Davies. Yes, sir.
Senator Cardin. Mr. Heidt, in regards to Cambodia, they are
not doing much better in trafficking. They have been downgraded
to a Tier 2 Watch List country. As has already been pointed
out, they are a poor country. So it is interesting that they
are also designated because they are a source of trafficking.
So it is not only that they are victimized by people in
Cambodia being trafficked out, there are also people that are
being victimized within Cambodia. So they have human rights
issues.
The most recent concern that has been expressed by human
rights groups is the draft NGO law, which has serious concerns
among NGOs about whether they are going to be able to operate
effectively in Cambodia.
So would you just share with me and this committee your
commitment to advance the basic human rights as our
representative, if confirmed, in Cambodia?
Mr. Heidt. Thank you very much, Senator.
Of course, promoting democracy and human rights has been a
central part of our program in Cambodia since I was there
before, ever since the 1993 Paris Peace Accords.
In the area of trafficking in persons, it is an area where
U.S. involvement has made a real difference. Both directly and
through NGOs, we have really been able to give Cambodia good
assistance, and as a result, as I mentioned in my statement,
they have been able to make substantial progress on the issue
of child sex trafficking. Now, that of course, is a
particularly pernicious and dreadful problem, and I think it is
important to give them credit for that progress.
At the same time, as you mentioned, there is a pretty
substantial labor trafficking problem in Cambodia flowing out
to neighboring countries, flowing into Cambodia from its
neighboring countries. And so certainly there is much more work
to be done in that area in terms of building cooperation
between Cambodia and the labor-receiving countries, especially
Malaysia. There is some evidence of complicity by government
officials in trafficking--that is a big problem--and as well as
pretty much a complete lack of victim assistance. When we find
victims of trafficking, the government has very little
assistance that they can offer.
So that is something I am absolutely committed to working
on that issue while I am out there, if confirmed. Like I say,
it has been an area where we have great success before that we
can be proud of, and we will continue to do that.
On the NGO law, of course, the concern there is that it
will limit the ability of the NGOs to do some of the good work
they are doing. NGOs perform a range of important services in
Cambodia. We have spoken to the government and publicly about
this law, and we frankly do not really see a need for it. We do
not think there is a giant problem that needs to be solved by
that. But if the government goes ahead with the law, as it
appears very likely--they considered it in the National
Assembly today in Phnom Penh--today, their time. They
considered it and pushed it out to three separate National
Assembly commissions. So it appears that it is going to move
forward. We have counseled them to consult widely when they do
it and to do it with a light touch, to focus on basic
transparency issues, not to make it a giant problem that really
squelches civil society in Cambodia.
Senator Cardin. Thank you for that answer.
If the chair would indulge me for one remaining question.
Ms. Galt, Mongolia is an encouraging country. There is a lot of
progress being made. They are Tier 2 on trafficking, which
means they still are not meeting the minimum standards,
although the report does point out they are making progress. So
they are moving in the right direction.
As I also pointed out, they are one of our allies. But
there are challenges regarding human rights and concerns about
internationally recognized freedom for its citizens.
I want to get your response to a potential issue, and that
is, Mongolia is resource-rich, which can become a problem for a
country if it is not managed properly. We have seen it as a
source of corruption in other countries. We have seen it as a
source of environmental problems in other countries. We have
seen it as a management issue creating problems with democracy
in other countries.
My question is, How will you focus on our mission in
Mongolia as to how they handle their resources to make sure
that it is used for the benefit of the people of Mongolia and
not used as a source that could be problematic for funding
corruption or antidemocratic principles, which we have seen in
too many countries around the world?
Ms. Galt. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
First, on the issue of trafficking, indeed, this continues
to be a concern in Mongolia, and if confirmed, I would work
very closely with the Government of Mongolia to combat
trafficking. We have a U.S. Government program working with an
NGO in Mongolia to raise public awareness of trafficking and to
work to implement Mongolia's antitrafficking legislation. So I
would look forward, if confirmed, to continuing on that front.
I think on the corruption issue, you are absolutely right.
This is very much on Mongolia's radar and very much on our
radar, as Mongolia develops its rich resources.
I think there are, again, two areas, as I said earlier,
where we can continue to work closely with Mongolia to
encourage them to develop these resources in a transparent and
fair way. And if confirmed, I would look forward to doing that.
The first is to continue to support Mongolia's leadership
in international institutions, including the Freedom Online
Coalition and the Community of Democracies, which are fora in
which Mongolia can learn best practices and develop its own
mechanisms and techniques for combating corruption domestically
and for developing its economy.
And then the second is our economic engagement. I think
through working with the Government of Mongolia to implement
the recently signed and ratified Transparency Agreement, that
gives us an opportunity to work very closely with them to
develop procedures, develop their institutions, and strengthen
their institutions to combat corruption. So I would look
forward to working with them on both of those fronts in that
challenge area.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Gardner. Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And to the witnesses and to the entire panel of the seven
nominees who are before us today, I am only able to be here for
the first panel. And I regret that because you all really do a
credit to the Nation with your extensive service. And I thank
each of you and I also thank your families and friends who are
here and who have been supportive.
Ms. Galt, if I could start with you since we are just
finishing on Mongolia, I am fascinated by a number of aspects
of the country and its transition from socialism to democracy.
In the Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index for 2014,
Mongolia was ranked 61st out of 167 countries ranked in the
democracy index. For a democracy this new that has transitioned
from socialism, that is not bad. If you dig into the ranking,
the EIU classifies Mongolia as a, quote, flawed democracy with
high marks for electoral processes and civil liberties but
lower marks for government functioning, political culture,
including a high degree of corruption in local politics.
Talk a little bit about your game plan if you are confirmed
to go in and accelerate the pro-democracy trends and
institutional improvements that Mongolia seems to be embracing
but that need improvement.
Ms. Galt. Indeed, if confirmed, this would be one of my
highest priorities to work closely with the Government of
Mongolia to strengthen their institutions, to combat
corruption, and to ensure a transparent and free market for
external investment. And I think encouraging and advocating for
more U.S. investment in Mongolia is one way that would be very
useful and productive for encouraging transparent economic
engagement in Mongolia. So that is one area that I would work
on, if confirmed.
The second area is through the Millennium Challenge
Corporation. As I mentioned earlier, the Millennium Challenge
leadership tells me that they feel very strongly that Mongolia
has learned some good lessons from the first compact. And as
they are engaging in their constraints analysis and
negotiations on a potential second compact for Mongolia, that
will be a tool that we can use to further influence the
institutional development and to ensure that Mongolia's
economic growth going forward is equitable and fair.
I think a third area I mentioned before, but we have an
ongoing engagement and plans for a new program with the
Government of Mongolia working with them on justice reform. And
that is a third area that I would have a high priority in terms
of improving their institutions and their capacity to handle
corruption and to deal transparently with corruption issues.
Senator Kaine. There have been some high profile cases in
Mongolia where foreign investors have been caught up in
business disputes and then blocked exit visas to leave,
Canadians, in one instance an American. Those have to create
challenges in terms of encouraging more investment.
What is the progress of the Mongolian Government in putting
reforms in place that would avoid those unless absolutely
necessary?
Ms. Galt. Indeed, I think investor confidence is at a low
point right now in Mongolia. But, again, our recent economic
engagement gives me a lot of encouragement as to potential for
a positive trend in the future. And if confirmed, I would
continue to work very closely on our economic front. So, number
one, implementing the Transparency Agreement is one very
important platform. A second is our Trade and Investment
Framework Agreement and our Economic Policy Dialogue, which
gives us another opportunity to engage. And then finally, the
Millennium Challenge would be another opportunity to grow
Mongolia's capacity in terms of its institutions. So those
would be three areas where I would work very closely were I to
have the opportunity.
Senator Kaine. And finally, the United States is sort of
deemed by Mongolia as the most important of its, quote, ``third
neighbors,'' so the neighbors that do not have borders with
Mongolia. As we are dealing with so many issues on this
committee and in the Senate generally about bilateral relations
between the United States and China and the United States and
Russia, I am interested in how Mongolia handles those bilateral
relationships and what are the current kind of temperature in
those sets of bilateral relationships between Mongolia and
China and Russia.
Ms. Galt. Indeed, Mongolia is in a tough neighborhood. I
think the chairman mentioned sandwiched between Russia and
China. And so it is very much in Mongolia's interest to
maintain a stable, positive relationship with both Russia and
China. Russia and China are both strong economic partners to
Mongolia. China purchases 80-plus percent of Mongolia's
resources. So it is very important for Mongolia to maintain a
positive economic trade and political relationship with China.
However, I think there is room for all of us. There is room
for Russia and China and for Mongolia's third neighbors. And so
if confirmed, I would look forward to continuing to enhance
both our political, economic, and military partnership with
Mongolia.
I think in addition to the strength of those aspects of our
partnership, U.S. soft power is a very powerful force in
Mongolia. Young people are looking to the United States. Young
people are studying English, thanks in large part to our Peace
Corps over the years, and studying in the United States and
returning to Mongolia. So the influence of the United States as
a fellow democracy and our shared values is a powerful offset
to the economic power of Mongolia's neighbors.
Senator Kaine. Thank you for those answers.
One question for you Mr. Heidt. I noticed that there are
analysts that are concerned about the Prime Minister's
placement of his sons in political positions of power within
Cambodia and what that might portend in the future. We have
seen in other nations around the world, whether it is Libya or
Egypt or Syria, once a structure of a ruling family starts to
be kind of perpetuated, that can lead to really significant
internal dissent.
What is the likelihood of that or your assessment in
Cambodia? What can the United States do to promote a more
vigorous democracy, not confined just to a single family?
Mr. Heidt. Thank you very much, Senator, for that question.
Of course, Hun Sen's sons, as you mentioned--several of
them are active, very active in the CPP. Our sense is looking
at that, that it is like many political parties. It is a
complex structure. There are lots of people who want to move to
the top. The folks that I have talked to--there is not a sense
that there is some preordained path for the two of them. It is
not North Korea. It is a big competitive party with lots of
ambitious people in it. And so even despite the obvious birth
advantages the two have, my sense is that there is no
guaranteed route to the top for them.
Of course, the other issue is, as we saw in 2013, electoral
politics in Cambodia are getting more competitive. And the
extent to which the opposition is able to rally and unify
around strong candidates, promote good candidates from below,
the extent to which, with international help, Cambodia's
election institutions get stronger and can deliver better
elections, those things also make it less likely that some sort
of family system develops in Cambodia. So I do think it is a
very competitive situation and one, of course, if confirmed, I
will keep an eye on.
Senator Gardner. Thank you. And thank you to the witnesses
today for your testimony, your comments, and your willingness,
again, to serve.
And in breaking with Senate tradition, we are going to stay
on schedule and stand in a short recess until Senator Risch
joins us and we reconvene at 11 o'clock.
[Pause.]
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES RISCH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM IDAHO
Senator Risch [presiding]. Thank you all for coming. This
Subcommittee on Near East, South and Central Asia of the
Foreign Relations Committee will come to order.
And today we have for hearing four nominees for different
positions around the world.
First of all, I want to thank all of our nominees for being
here today and your families and for your willingness to serve.
The countries you are nominated to are tough posts, to say the
least, and it really highlights that you and your families are
willing to make the sacrifices to go and to serve in those
posts. We really do appreciate your efforts in that regard.
First, I am going to introduce all of you at once. I want
to talk about each of the countries very briefly and talk about
where we are with them, and hopefully, you will correct me if I
am inaccurate or add to that if you think that is appropriate.
Obviously, Mr. Hale is going to Pakistan. And while the
official U.S. policy toward Pakistan is to assist the creation
of a more stable democratic and prosperous Pakistan, the United
States-Pakistan relationship is an important but equally
frustrating relationship, as we all know. Support for U.S.
presence in Afghanistan has been vital, but over the years,
Pakistan's support for the Taliban in Afghanistan and the safe
havens in the FATA has set back efforts to move Afghanistan and
the region forward. The idea of a new Silk Road across South
and Central Asia would bring economic prosperity to many,
especially in Pakistan, but border disputes with India cripple
the cooperation.
Recently this spring, a number of us had the opportunity to
meet a delegation from the Pakistani governing body, the
Parliament that were here. And I have to say I think all of us
were impressed with their sincerity and their commitment to do
the things that would better the United States-Pakistan
relationship.
The June 2014 operation against militant groups in FATA was
a good effort to bring more stability to the border with
Afghanistan, and hopefully the United States-Pakistan strategic
dialogue can produce more tangible results politically and
economically.
The past several years have shown us that despite enormous
U.S. aid, Pakistan will only prosper when the country can
create a stable environment for trade and foreign direct
investment. To achieve this kind of success, the international
community needs a serious partner in the Pakistan Government
that can deepen its political institutions and work through its
relationship with India and others. After our meeting with the
delegation from Pakistan, I think all of us believe that they
have a sincere commitment to attempt to do that.
Regarding Nepal, the recent earthquake in Nepal has been
tragic and the international commitment to Nepal has shifted
accordingly. The outpouring of support from around the world
requires a sustained focus on rebuilding the country, but donor
coordination is going to be a daunting task and we must make
sure both U.S. assistance and other aid is timed appropriately
and not wasted on projects that are neither needed nor helpful
for the people of Nepal. These kinds of things happen, of
course, when you do get a flood of cash that comes in after a
serious problem as has taken place in Nepal.
In the aftermath of the earthquake, I also hope there will
be a renewed sense of unity that can help Nepal move forward
and find the political consensus necessary to finally draft a
new constitution which, as we all know, they have been
struggling with for some time.
In addition, you will have a particularly important job
taking care of our people. While Embassy Staff work to help
Nepal build, they are also rebuilding their own lives and
making sure they get their own support, and that will be
crucial.
Regarding Sri Lanka and the Maldives where Mr. Keshap is
headed, the January election and change in power has created a
substantial shift for the region. The government's efforts to
tackle corruption, deepen reconciliation, and rebalance its
position among the other regional powers provide an enormous
opportunity for Sri Lanka. The new President, we hope, will
maintain his commitment to change, and if indeed he follows
through on that, it is going to be a sea change for the region.
Ms. Gwaltney is going to the Kyrgyz Republic. Central Asia,
as we all know, has been a hard place for the United States.
English is often the fourth or fifth language spoken, if at
all, in the region. The dominance of Russia and the proximity
of China, as well as the Soviet legacy, presents significant
challenges and tempered expectations. The Kyrgyz Republic
clearly embodies all of these intersecting challenges. However,
there is still a lot of work we can do leading up to the
parliamentary elections in October, and hopefully we can find
some success helping to develop their economy. But I worry
about the destabilizing role that Russia can play for its own
strategic interests.
With that said, I look forward to all of your testimony.
First of all, I would like to briefly introduce each of the
nominees here starting with Mr. David Hale, who has been
nominated for the Pakistan posting. Mr. Hale is a native of New
Jersey who also received his undergraduate degree from the
Georgetown School of Foreign Service and joined the Foreign
Service in 1984. Mr. Hale has extensive experience in the
Middle East, serving at posts in Israel, Jordan, Lebanon,
Bahrain, and others, including his most recent as U.S.
Ambassador to Lebanon. He is clearly experienced in tough
postings and jobs that might make Pakistan look like an easy
assignment.
Ms. Gwaltney is going to the Kyrgyz Republic. Ms. Gwaltney
is from Woodland, CA, with a B.A. from UC-Davis, a masters from
George Washington University. Again, her extensive experience
working in and around Russia. Ms. Gwaltney has substantial
experience to support her in this new role.
Ms. Teplitz, appointed to Nepal, was born in Chicago, IL,
and received her B.A. at Georgetown University. She has served
in numerous positions at the State Department and the region.
With her management background and the current challenges in
Nepal, she is well suited to assume this position.
Mr. Keshap, who has been appointed to serve in Sri Lanka
and the Maldives, was born in Nigeria, educated at the
University of Virginia with both a bachelors and masters
degree. Mr. Keshap has extensive experience with Southeast
Asia, including his current post as the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs at
State. He has won numerous awards for his work and, at the same
time, has found time to well raise his four children.
So in any event, thank you all again for the willingness to
serve and your families likewise for the willingness to serve.
Now we would like to hear a few minutes from each of you.
We will start with Mr. Hale, who has been nominated for
Pakistan.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID HALE, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN
Ambassador Hale. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much
for the introduction and thank you for the opportunity to
appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to be the
next American Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. I
am humbled by the confidence President Obama and Secretary
Kerry have placed in me, and if I am confirmed, I look forward
to working with the Senate on how best to advance U.S.
interests in Pakistan.
I have had the privilege of serving in the Foreign Service
for 31 years, and most of my career has been spent advancing
U.S. interests in the Middle East and the Muslim world as
Ambassador to Lebanon, as U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle
East, and earlier as Ambassador to Jordan.
During my previous tours as Ambassador, my highest priority
was the safety and security of all American personnel,
information, and facilities, as well as the safety and security
of American citizens. And if confirmed, I will have no higher
priority in Pakistan.
Pakistan is a strategically important country for achieving
U.S. national security interests. We have a strong stake in
Pakistan's ability to combat militancy and strengthen its
democratic institutions. And broadly speaking, the United
States has four core interests in Pakistan: first, defeating
al-Qaeda and countering militancy; second, nonproliferation and
nuclear security; third, political and economic stability which
includes respect for human rights; and fourth, regional
stability, including improved relations with Afghanistan and
with India.
And while there is more to be done on all fronts, the last
few years have witnessed progress toward these goals as the
United States and Pakistan have built a more stable, forthright
relationship. With regard to counterterrorism, Pakistan has
taken important actions that have brought to justice several
senior al-Qaeda leaders. It launched a significant military
operation in North Waziristan last June, capturing large
weapons caches and closing safe havens for multiple terrorist
groups. We welcome Pakistan's commitment to target all militant
groups on Pakistani soil equally, an objective that is
absolutely in the interest of the United States and one on
which, if confirmed, I will work closely with the Pakistan
Government to advance.
We and the Pakistanis also share deep concern and must
remain vigilant for any sign that ISIL is gaining a foothold in
Pakistan. Our shared strategic interests extend well beyond any
particular group. It is from the ungoverned spaces in remote
parts of the border region that spring a multitude of threats,
both militant and criminal, affecting Pakistan, the region, and
the broader world, including America.
We are also actively engaged with Pakistan on strategic
stability and nonproliferation issues. While our governments do
not see eye to eye on all issues, we share a number of common
interests, including the high importance of ensuring nuclear
security and preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction.
Relations with its neighbors play an important part in
Pakistan's security and prosperity. Pakistan has undertaken
important outreach to Afghanistan following the Afghan
election, and the two countries have made some progress toward
terrorist safe havens on both sides of the border. Given the
drawdown in United States forces in Afghanistan, it is all the
more critical that relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan
be strong and cooperative and that Pakistan continue to put
pressure on the Taliban to join an Afghan-led peace process.
Pakistan's relationship with India is critical to Pakistan's
future, and the normalization of relations between those two
countries is vital both to them and to the region.
Experience has demonstrated that sustained, consistent
engagement with Pakistan provides us with the best chance to
address challenges and advance our core interests. The United
States-Pakistan strategic dialogue is the mechanism that
underpins our cooperation in areas of shared interest, from
counterterrorism to energy, from economic growth to defense and
security. All six of the strategic dialogue working groups have
met within the last year.
U.S. civilian assistance to Pakistan has delivered
impressive results and must continue. Our signature projects in
Pakistan have added 1,500 megawatts to Pakistan's electric grid
and built over 1,100 kilometers of road.
U.S. security assistance to Pakistan is equally important.
It directly supports Pakistan's ability to conduct
counterinsurgency operations, clear terrorist safe havens, and
stem the flow of deadly improvised explosive devices, which
have killed far too many civilians and security personnel.
Should I be confirmed, I look forward to working with
Congress and this committee, with our extraordinary team in
both Washington and Pakistan, with the government and people of
Pakistan and with the community of Americans of Pakistani
descent here in the United States.
And, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, let me reiterate
how deeply honored I am to be here today and to be nominated as
the Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan. Thank you
very much for considering my nomination. I would be pleased to
answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ambassador Hale follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ambassador David Hale
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, members of the committee,
thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to be the next American Ambassador to the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan. I am humbled by the confidence President Obama
and Secretary Kerry have placed in me. If I am confirmed by the Senate,
I look forward to working with the Senate on how best to advance U.S.
interests in Pakistan.
I have had the privilege of serving in the Foreign Service since
1984. Most of my career has been spent advancing U.S. interests in the
Middle East and the Muslim world, including most recently as Ambassador
to the Lebanese Republic. Before that, I served as the U.S. Special
Envoy for Middle East Peace, and earlier, as Ambassador to Jordan.
During my previous tours as Ambassador, my highest priority was the
safety and the security of all American personnel, information, and
facilities, as well as the safety and security of American citizens. If
confirmed, I will have no higher priority in Pakistan.
Pakistan is a strategically important country for achieving U.S.
national security interests. We have a strong stake in Pakistan's
ability to combat militancy and strengthen its democratic institutions.
Broadly speaking, the United States has four core interests in
Pakistan: first, defeating al-Qaeda and countering militancy; second,
nonproliferation and nuclear security; third, political and economic
stability which includes respect for human rights; and fourth, regional
stability, including improved relations with Afghanistan and India.
While there is more to be done on all fronts, the last few years
have witnessed progress toward these goals as the United States and
Pakistan have built a more stable, forthright relationship. With regard
to counterterrorism, Pakistan has taken important actions that have
brought to justice several senior al-Qaeda leaders. It launched a
significant military operation in North Waziristan last June, capturing
large weapons caches and closing safe havens for multiple terrorist
groups. We welcome Pakistan's commitment to target all militant groups
on Pakistani soil equally--an objective that is absolutely in the
interests of the United States, and one on which, if confirmed, I will
work closely with the Pakistani Government to advance. We and the
Pakistanis also share deep concern and must remain vigilant for any
sign that ISIL is gaining a foothold in Pakistan. Our shared, strategic
interests extend well beyond any particular group; it is from the
ungoverned spaces in remote parts of the border region that spring a
multitude of threats, both militant and criminal, affecting Pakistan,
the region, and the broader world, including the United States.
We are also actively engaged with Pakistan on strategic stability
and nonproliferation issues. While our governments do not see eye to
eye on all issues, we share a number of common interests including the
high importance of ensuring nuclear security and preventing the
proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. We are pleased that
Pakistan is fully engaged with the international community on nuclear
safety and security issues, including as an active partner in the
Nuclear Security Summit process.
At the same time, Pakistan is an often boisterous democracy of
nearly 200 million people with a growing economy. In 2013, it completed
its first democratic transition from one elected civilian government to
another. The Government of Pakistan has made real strides in unlocking
Pakistan's growth potential, and is working to advance an economic
reform program in close collaboration with the International Monetary
Fund. Just last week, Moody's recognized the government's progress by
raising its sovereign credit rating. Still, there is work to be done.
Rule of law, tolerance, and respect for the rights of all citizens are
guiding principles for all thriving democracies.
Relations with its neighbors play an important part in Pakistan's
security and prosperity. Pakistan has undertaken important outreach to
Afghanistan following the Afghan election, and the two countries have
made some progress against terrorist safe havens on both sides of the
border. Given the drawdown in U.S. forces in Afghanistan, it is all the
more critical that relations between Pakistan and Afghanistan be strong
and cooperative, and that Pakistan continue to put pressure on the
Taliban to join an Afghan-led peace process. Pakistan's relationship
with India is critical to Pakistan's future. The normalization of
relations between the two countries is vital, both to them and to the
region.
Experience has demonstrated that sustained, consistent engagement
with Pakistan provides us with the best chance to address challenges
and advance our core interests. The U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue is
the mechanism that underpins our cooperation in areas of shared
interest, from counterterrorism to energy, from economic growth to
defense and security; all six of the Strategic Dialogue working
groups--law enforcement and counterterrorism; economics and finance;
energy; defense; strategic stability and nonproliferation; and
education, science, and technology--have met within the last year.
U.S. civilian assistance to Pakistan has delivered impressive
results and must continue. Our signature projects in Pakistan have
added over 1,500 megawatts to Pakistan's electric grid, and built over
1,100 kilometers of road. Each year, the United States sponsors
thousands of Pakistani exchange students to the United States--
including a larger investment in the Fulbright Program than anywhere
else in the world. These are long-term investments which advance
bilateral people to people exchanges, Pakistan's stability and growth,
and help promote a pluralistic and tolerant society.
U.S. security assistance to Pakistan is equally important and is
directly supporting Pakistan's ability to conduct counterinsurgency
operations, clear terrorist safe havens, and stem the flow of deadly
improvised explosive devices (IEDs) which have killed far too many
civilians and security personnel. Our security assistance, like our
civilian assistance, is geared directly toward meeting critical U.S.
national security objectives.
Should I be confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress and
this committee, our extraordinary team in both Washington and Pakistan,
who are dedicated and accept risks in order to achieve the goals of the
American people, with the government and people of Pakistan, and with
the community of Americans of Pakistani descent here in the United
States. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy and members of the
committee, let me reiterate how deeply honored I am to be nominated as
the Ambassador to the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
Thank you very much for considering my nomination. I would be
pleased to answer your questions.
Senator Risch. Mr. Hale, thank you very much.
We have been joined by Ranking Member Murphy, and if you do
not have opening statement, we will move on.
Senator Murphy. Keep going.
Senator Risch. Ms. Teplitz, you are next. We would like to
hear what you have to say.
STATEMENT OF ALAINA B. TEPLITZ, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE FEDERAL DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC OF NEPAL
Ms. Teplitz. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, it is an
honor to appear before you today as the President's nominee for
the U.S. Ambassador to Nepal. I am grateful for this
opportunity to serve our country.
And I would like to recognize some of my family who are
with me today, my sons, Max and Miles Mellott. And a shout-out
to those who could not be here because I would not be at this
table without them and their support.
Mr. Chairman, as you noted in your remarks, right now when
people think of Nepal, they invariably think of the horrific
earthquake of this past April and the tremendous damage it
wrought. That tragedy has brought together the people of Nepal,
the country's neighbors, and the international community to
help the victims recover and the country rebuild.
And while much has changed in Nepal since the earthquake,
our overall priorities for the country remain the same: to
strengthen its democracy, advance its economic growth, and
improve its resiliency. If confirmed, I will work to advance
these goals and build on the achievements of my predecessors
and our 60 years of positive engagement with Nepal.
I will speak first about the last objective, improved
resiliency, and then discuss the other two priorities. At the
top, I would like to extend the Department's profound gratitude
to Congress for its support for seismically safe housing for
U.S. Embassy personnel in Kathmandu. It saved the lives of our
mission personnel and enabled them to immediately assist with
rescue and relief efforts, thus saving more lives and reducing
the quake's impact on Americans, Nepalese, and others.
The first responsibility of every U.S. Ambassador is to
ensure the safety and security of American citizens, and if
confirmed, I will continue to prioritize investments that will
protect our personnel and citizens.
And as Nepal moves to the reconstruction phase, we will
work with its government and its neighbors in Asia to help it
build back better, to provide protection to the most
vulnerable, to improve resiliency against future disasters, and
to ensure that investments in Nepal's infrastructure are
economically sound and environmentally stable. And as you
pointed out, if confirmed, I will share your focus on donor
coordination throughout this effort.
Turning now to the second priority, advancing Nepal's
economic growth. As we work to help Nepal's economy grow and
advance, we must look to leverage its location among the
booming economies of South Asia. With more investments in
infrastructure, the creation of a business- and investment-
friendly environment, and a more integrated regional market,
Nepal's entrepreneurs could harness the region's economic
potential and create tremendous prosperity for their nation.
Nepal's recent eligibility for a Millennium Challenge
Corporation--MCC-- compact should help it develop some of that
economic potential. If confirmed, I will actively look for
opportunities to improve the business environment and support
American investment in Nepal.
I would lastly like to discuss our priority of
strengthening Nepal's democracy. In 2006, the country emerged
from a decade of civil conflict with a commitment to creating a
constitution that would seal a lasting peace. The American
people can be proud of the role they have played in Nepal's
transition from violence to peaceful politics. That process is
still underway. And there has been some significant progress
lately. Nepal became eligible for an MCC compact because of its
democratic progress. But much remains to be done, and our
Government will help Nepal where we can to advance its
constitutional process and cement a hard-won peace.
Maintaining that peace will require a firm commitment to
human rights, and if I am confirmed, the promotion and
protection of human rights will remain a central priority for
Mission Kathmandu. This particularly includes protections for
Tibetan refugees, for women, for disadvantaged populations, and
for those vulnerable to trafficking.
Mr. Chairman, I am aware of the many challenges we will
face in these efforts, from maintaining good coordination with
Nepal's Government and our international partners, to ensuring
our resources are being spent effectively.
My career in the Foreign Service has been dedicated to the
efficient management of resources, whether for our missions in
Kabul, Dhaka, Belgium, or here in Washington at the Foreign
Service Institute or in the Bureau of South and Central Asian
Affairs. My experience, it would seem, is very timely for this
posting.
With the support of Congress, our Government is preparing
for a large recovery and reconstruction effort in Nepal, and if
confirmed, I hope to draw on my management experience and
expertise to help ensure the people of Nepal get the best
assistance we can give and that the U.S. taxpayers get the
biggest bang for their buck.
As that assistance effort progresses, I would, if
confirmed, look forward to working closely with this committee
and others in Congress to ensure our work reflects our shared
priorities.
Thank you again for the opportunity, and I look forward to
your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Teplitz follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alaina B. Teplitz
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee, it is an
honor to appear before you today as the President's nominee for U.S.
Ambassador to Nepal.
I would like to recognize some of my family who are with me today
and without whom I would not be at this table before you: my sons Max
and Miles Mellott.
Mr. Chairman, right now when people think of Nepal, they invariably
think of the horrific earthquake of this past April, and the tremendous
damage it wrought. That tragedy has brought together the people of
Nepal, the country's neighbors, and the international community to help
the victims recover and the country rebuild.
And while much has changed in Nepal since the earthquake, our
overall priorities for the country remain the same: to strengthen its
democracy, advance its economic growth, and improve its resiliency. If
confirmed, I will work to advance these goals and build on the
achievements of my predecessors and our 60 years of positive engagement
with Nepal.
I will speak first about the last objective, improved resiliency,
and then discuss the other two priorities. At the top, I would like to
extend the Department's profound gratitude to Congress for its support
for seismically safe housing for U.S. Embassy personnel in Kathmandu.
It saved the lives of our mission personnel and enabled them to
immediately assist with rescue and relief efforts, thus saving more
lives and reducing the quake's impact on Americans, Nepalese, and
others.
The first responsibility of every U.S. Ambassador is to ensure the
safety and security of American citizens, and, if confirmed, I will
continue to prioritize investments that will protect our personnel and
citizens in Nepal.
And as Nepal moves to the reconstruction phase, we will work with
its government and its neighbors in Asia to help it to ``build back
better''--to provide protection to the most vulnerable, to improve
resiliency against future disasters, and to ensure that investments in
Nepal's infrastructure are economically sound and environmentally
sustainable.
I will now turn to the second priority, advancing Nepal's economic
growth. As we work to help Nepal's economy grow and advance, we must
look to leverage its location among the booming economies of South
Asia. With more investments in infrastructure, the creation of a
business- and investment-friendly environment, and a more integrated
regional market, Nepal's entrepreneurs could harness the region's
economic potential and create tremendous prosperity for their nation.
Nepal's recent eligibility for a Millennium Challenge Corporation
Compact should help it develop some of that economic potential. If
confirmed, I will actively look for opportunities to improve the
business environment and support American investment in Nepal.
I would lastly like to discuss our priority of strengthening
Nepal's democracy. In 2006, the country emerged from a decade of civil
conflict with a commitment to creating a constitution that would seal a
lasting peace. The American people can be proud of the role they have
played in Nepal's transition from violence to peaceful politics. That
process is still underway, and there has been some significant progress
lately--Nepal became eligible for an MCC Compact because of its
democratic progress. But much remains to be done, and our government
will help Nepal where we can to advance its constitutional process and
cement a hard-won peace.
Maintaining that peace will require a firm commitment to human
rights, and, if I am confirmed, the promotion and protection of human
rights will remain a central priority for Mission Kathmandu. This
especially includes protections for Tibetan refugees, for women, for
disadvantaged populations, and for those vulnerable to trafficking.
Mr. Chairman, I am aware of the many challenges we will face in
these efforts, from maintaining good coordination with Nepal's
Government and our international partners, to ensuring our resources
are being spent effectively.
My career in the Foreign Service has been dedicated to the
efficient management of resources, whether for our missions in Kabul,
Dhaka, or Belgium, here in Washington at the Foreign Service Institute
or in the Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs.
With the support of Congress, our government is preparing for a
large recovery and reconstruction effort in Nepal, and, if confirmed, I
hope to draw on my management experience and expertise to help ensure
the people of Nepal get the best assistance we can give, and that the
U.S. taxpayers get the biggest bang for their buck.
As that assistance effort progresses, I would, if confirmed, look
forward to working closely with this committee and others in Congress
to ensure our work reflects our shared priorities.
Thank you and I look forward to your questions.
Senator Risch. Thank you very much.
Ms. Gwaltney?
STATEMENT OF SHEILA GWALTNEY, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE KYRGYZ REPUBLIC
Ms. Gwaltney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Murphy.
It is a great honor to appear before you today as President
Obama's nominee to serve as the United States Ambassador to the
Kyrgyz Republic. I am deeply grateful for the trust and
confidence the President and Secretary Kerry have shown in me
with this nomination. If confirmed, I look forward to working
closely with the members of this committee and their staff to
promote and protect U.S. interests in the Kyrgyz Republic.
I have had the privilege of serving our country for 31
years as a Foreign Service officer. I have served as Deputy
Chief of Mission in the Kyrgyz Republic, Ukraine, and Russia
and have worked on issues related to this region for most of my
career. I can think of no higher honor than to return to
represent the American people as Ambassador of the United
States to the Kyrgyz Republic, a country I know and respect for
its rich culture, natural beauty, and warm and hospitable
people. I deeply appreciate the love and support of my family
and friends throughout these years.
The principles that have guided U.S. policy toward the
Kyrgyz Republic remain as relevant today as they were when the
country attained independence 23 years ago. Our long-term focus
has always been to support and respect its sovereignty,
territorial integrity, and independence. Our strategic goals
are to facilitate and strengthen the Kyrgyz Republic's
stability, prosperity, and democracy.
The Kyrgyz Republic is Central Asia's leader in democratic
development. In 2011, following the election of President
Atambayev, the Kyrgyz Republic accomplished the first
democratic transfer of Presidential in Central Asia. The Kyrgyz
Republic has an independent Parliament and a vibrant and active
civil society, with thousands of nongovernmental organizations
working in a wide variety of fields. If confirmed, I would work
with the government and people of the Kyrgyz Republic to
strengthen the country's democratic institutions, support the
continued growth of civil society, and promote respect for
human rights.
Our security cooperation with the Kyrgyz Republic is
focused on the common goals of countering terrorism, improving
border security, and stemming the flow of illegal narcotics.
The United States and the Kyrgyz Republic need to work together
to fight human trafficking and other transnational threats. If
confirmed, I would work to strengthen our existing partnership
and continue our joint efforts to address regional and global
security challenges.
Expanding markets and opportunities for American business
is a top priority worldwide. As Secretary Kerry says, ``Foreign
policy is economic policy.'' If confirmed, I would work with
the Kyrgyz Republic to bolster private sector-driven economic
growth, including the promotion of American economic and
business interests. The Kyrgyz Republic has been a regional
leader in pursuing market reform and our two nations can work
together to expand prosperity for both our countries.
People-to-people contacts remain the bedrock of our
diplomatic efforts. If confirmed, I look forward to engaging
people throughout the Kyrgyz Republic and strengthening ties
between the American and the Kyrgyz people. Public diplomacy
efforts promote a positive understanding of the United States
and help build deep and lasting ties between our countries.
If confirmed, it would be my honor to ensure that our
mission continues to provide U.S. citizens resident in or
visiting the Kyrgyz Republic the highest quality service and
utmost protection.
Mr. Chairman, one of the great privileges of my career has
been the opportunity to help lead teams of Americans serving at
our embassies overseas that are dedicated to the advancement of
U.S. interests. If confirmed, I would do my best to ensure the
safety, security, and well-being of my colleagues and their
family members who serve at our Embassy. I would maintain the
highest standards of ethical conduct and moral values for our
mission, including ensuring that the principles of
nondiscrimination and respect for diversity are respected by
all in our mission.
If confirmed, I would always be available to this
committee, its members, and staff, to discuss and work together
in pursuit of U.S. national interests in the Kyrgyz Republic.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to appear
before you and the other members of the subcommittee and look
forward to your questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Gwaltney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sheila Gwaltney
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, it is a
great honor to appear before you today as President Obama's nominee to
serve as the United States Ambassador to the Kyrgyz Republic. I am
deeply grateful for the trust and confidence the President and
Secretary Kerry have shown in me with this nomination. If confirmed, I
look forward to working closely with the members of this committee and
their staff to promote and protect U.S. interests in the Kyrgyz
Republic.
I have had the privilege of serving our country for 31 years as a
Foreign Service officer. I have served as Deputy Chief of Mission in
the Kyrgyz Republic, Ukraine and Russia and have worked on issues
related to this region for most of my career. I can think of no higher
honor than to return to represent the American people as Ambassador of
the United States to the Kyrgyz Republic, a country I know and respect
for its rich culture, natural beauty, and warm and hospitable people. I
deeply appreciate the love and support of my family and friends
throughout these years.
The principles that have guided U.S. policy toward the Kyrgyz
Republic remain as relevant today as they were when that country
attained independence 23 years ago. Our long-term focus has always been
to support and respect its sovereignty, territorial integrity, and
independence. Our strategic goals are to facilitate and strengthen the
Kyrgyz Republic's stability, prosperity, and democracy.
The Kyrgyz Republic is Central Asia's leader in democratic
development. In 2011, following the election of President Atambayev,
the Kyrgyz Republic accomplished the first democratic transfer of
Presidential power in Central Asia. The Kyrgyz Republic has an
independent Parliament and a vibrant and active civil society, with
thousands of nongovernmental organizations working in a wide variety of
fields. If confirmed, I would work with the government and people of
the Kyrgyz Republic to strengthen the country's democratic
institutions, support the continued growth of civil society, and
promote respect for human rights.
Our security cooperation with the Kyrgyz Republic is focused on the
common goals of countering terrorism, improving border security, and
stemming the flow of illegal narcotics. The United States and the
Kyrgyz Republic need to work together to fight human trafficking and
other transnational threats.If confirmed, I would work to strengthen
our existing partnership and continue our joint efforts to address
regional and global security challenges.
Expanding markets and opportunities for American business is a top
priority worldwide. As Secretary Kerry says, ``Foreign policy is
economic policy.'' If confirmed, I would work with the Kyrgyz Republic
to bolster private-sector-driven economic growth, including through the
promotion of American economic and business interests. The Kyrgyz
Republic has been a regional leader in pursuing market reforms and our
two nations can work together to expand prosperity for both our
countries.
People-to-people contacts remain the bedrock of our diplomatic
efforts. If confirmed, I look forward to engaging people throughout the
Kyrgyz Republic and strengthening ties between the American and Kyrgyz
people. Public diplomacy efforts promote a positive understanding of
the United States and help build deep and lasting ties between our
countries.
If confirmed, it would be my honor to ensure that our mission
continues to provide U.S. citizens residing in or visiting the Kyrgyz
Republic the highest quality services and utmost protection in times of
need.
Mr. Chairman, one of the great privileges of my career has been the
opportunity to help lead teams of Americans serving at our embassies
overseas that are dedicated to the advancement of U.S. interests. If
confirmed, I would do my best to ensure the safety, security, and well-
being of my colleagues and their family members who serve at our
Embassy. I would maintain the highest standards of ethical conduct and
moral values for our mission, including ensuring that the principles of
nondiscrimination and respect for diversity are respected by all in our
mission.
If confirmed, I would always be available to this committee, its
members and staff, to discuss and work together in pursuit of U.S.
national interests in the Kyrgyz Republic.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to appear before you
and the other members of the subcommittee and look forward to your
questions.
Senator Risch. Thank you very much.
We are now going to have a series of questions. I am sorry.
I did not mean to pass you up, Mr. Keshap. Your turn. I
apologize.
STATEMENT OF ATUL KESHAP, NOMINATED TO BE AMBASSADOR TO THE
DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST REPUBLIC OF SRI LANKA AND TO THE REPUBLIC
OF THE MALDIVES
Mr. Keshap. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy,
Senator Shaheen.
It is, indeed, an honor to appear before you today as the
President's nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador to Sri Lanka
and to the Maldives. I am grateful to President Obama for his
trust and confidence in nominating me and to Secretary Kerry
and my State Department colleagues, particularly Assistant
Secretary Nisha Biswal, for their support.
Permit me to begin, Mr. Chair, by thanking my wife, Karen
Young Keshap, who is also a Foreign Service officer, for her
love and support throughout the two decades we have served our
country and for raising our four wonderful children, Carolyn,
Emily, James, and Charlotte, who are here today.
I am honored to be here as well with my respected mother,
Zoe Antoinette Calvert, who served in the U.S. Foreign Service
in the 1950s and 1960s in our Embassies in India and the United
Kingdom. I also pay tribute to my late father, Dr. Keshap
Chander Sen, an immigrant to this country from India, who
served the United Nations as a development economist.
Mr. Chairman, due to my father's U.N. service, my early
years were spent at schools overseas, where the children of
American diplomats were my earliest friends. My parents'
service and my upbringing instilled in me a firm dedication and
commitment to American values and led me to a career in the
Foreign Service.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, my top priorities will be to
ensure the safety and security of American citizens and to
advance the interests and values of the United States and the
American people.
In Sri Lanka, our primary interest is to help the people of
that island succeed as a prosperous, unified, reconciled,
peaceful, and democratic nation.
At the beginning of this year, the people of South Asia's
oldest democracy courageously chose a new path of hope and
renewal. Since January, Sri Lanka has made progress on
challenging issues from fighting corruption and media
censorship to beginning the long process of healing after
decades of war.
We want to help the Sri Lankan people strengthen democracy,
civil society, and human rights, including media freedom and
freedom of religion. We want to help build a lasting peace and
fellowship among Sri Lanka's ethnic and religious communities,
including credible justice, accountability, and reconciliation
that can facilitate closure for those who suffered and lost
loved ones during the war. It is important to get this right,
and the U.N. and the international community can lend useful
insight to the efforts of the Sri Lankan people.
Economically, the United States is Sri Lanka's largest
export market. While our trade volume is currently relatively
low, I believe there is great potential to expand our
partnership.
In the security realm, our de-mining efforts have helped
farmers return to once war-ravaged land. There is also room for
closer cooperation on disaster response and maritime security.
Sri Lanka is a regional leader in the fight against cybercrime,
a contributor to U.N. peacekeeping operations, and is focused
on disrupting drug trafficking and fighting maritime piracy. As
we look to advance our interests across the Indo-Pacific, Sri
Lanka can be a critical partner.
I will now turn to the Maldives where a young and dynamic
populace is on the front lines of climate change. This island
nation also faces challenges with youth unemployment, rising
extremism, and social unrest. We are worried, however, about
the current state of rule of law, due process, and human
rights. All citizens should be allowed to exercise their human
rights and fundamental freedoms.
We must remain engaged, however, on several important
mutual interests, including countering violent extremism,
reducing the impact of climate change, and as with Sri Lanka,
ensuring security in the Indian Ocean. We want a better
relationship with Maldives so that we can deepen that
cooperation. And we want to help it return to the democratic
path on which it courageously embarked a few years ago and look
forward to strengthening our relationship when that happens.
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, Senator Shaheen, the
democratic progress, economic growth, and security of Sri Lanka
and Maldives affect not just their own countries, but the
broader Indo-Pacific region. If confirmed, I will consult
closely with this committee and others in Congress to advance
U.S. values and interests.
Thank you very much for your consideration of my
nomination. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Keshap follows:]
Prepared Statement of Atul Keshap
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
before you today as the President's nominee to serve as U.S. Ambassador
to Sri Lanka and to Maldives. I am grateful to President Obama for his
trust and confidence in nominating me, and to Secretary Kerry and my
State Department colleagues, particularly Assistant Secretary Nisha
Biswal, for their support.
Permit me to begin by thanking my wife, Karen Young Keshap, also a
Foreign Service officer, for her love and support throughout the two
decades we have served our country, and for raising our four wonderful
children. I am honored to be here with my respected Mother, Zoe
Antoinette Calvert, who served in the United States Foreign Service at
our Embassies in India and the United Kingdom. I also pay tribute to my
late father, Dr. Keshap Chander Sen, an immigrant to this country from
India, who served the United Nations as a development economist.
Mr. Chairman, due to my father's U.N. service, my early years were
spent at schools overseas, where the children of American diplomats
were my earliest friends. My parents' service and my upbringing
instilled in me a firm dedication and commitment to American values,
and led me to a career in the Foreign Service.
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, my top priorities will be to ensure the
security and safety of American citizens and to advance the interests
and values of the United States and the American people.
In Sri Lanka, our primary interest is to help the people of that
island succeed as a prosperous, unified, reconciled, peaceful, and
democratic nation.
At the beginning of this year, the people of South Asia's oldest
democracy courageously chose a new path of hope and renewal. Since
January, Sri Lanka has made progress on challenging issues, from
fighting corruption and media censorship, to beginning the long process
of healing after decades of war.
We want to help the Sri Lankan people strengthen democracy, civil
society, and human rights, including media freedom and freedom of
religion. We want to help build a lasting peace and fellowship among
Sri Lanka's ethnic and religious communities, including credible
justice, accountability, and reconciliation that can facilitate closure
for those who suffered and lost loved ones during the war. It is
important to get this right, and the U.N. and international community
can lend useful insight to the efforts of the Sri Lankan people.
Economically, the U.S. is Sri Lanka's largest export market. While
our trade volume is relatively low, there is great potential to expand
our partnership.
In the security realm, our de-mining efforts have helped farmers
return to once-war-ravaged land. There is also room for closer
cooperation on disaster response and maritime security in the Indian
Ocean. Sri Lanka is a regional leader in the fight against cybercrime,
a contributor to U.N. Peacekeeping Operations, and is focused on
disrupting drug trafficking and fighting maritime piracy. As we look to
advance our interests across the Indo-Pacific, Sri Lanka will be a
critical partner.
I will now turn to Maldives, where a young and dynamic populace is
on the front lines of climate change. This island nation also faces
challenges with youth unemployment, rising extremism, and social
unrest. We are worried, however, about the current state of rule of
law, due process, and human rights. All citizens should be allowed to
exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms.
We must remain engaged, however, on several important mutual
interests, including countering violent extremism, reducing the impact
of climate change, and, as with Sri Lanka, ensuring security in the
Indian Ocean. We want a better relationship with Maldives, so that we
can deepen cooperation. And we want to help it return to the democratic
path on which it courageously embarked a few years ago, and look
forward to strengthening our relationship when that happens.
Mr. Chairman, the democratic progress, economic growth, and
security of Sri Lanka and Maldives affect not just their own countries,
but the broader Indo-Pacific region. If confirmed, I will consult
closely with this committee and others in Congress to advance U.S.
values and interests.
Thank you for your consideration of my nomination. I look forward
to your questions.
Senator Risch. Thank you very much.
Now we will go through a round of questions from each of
us. Since I tried to short you, Mr. Keshap, I will start there.
Your description of what has happened recently in Sri Lanka
with the election of the new President certainly reflects, I
think, all of our hopes and our good wishes for the people of
that country.
I hear your description of it. What is happening today? Is
that movement increasing? Is it decreasing? Has it leveled off?
Where are we today as far as the movement from the January
election?
Mr. Keshap. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I take great heart and confidence in the significant desire
of the people of Sri Lanka to embark upon a new path in their
country. The election of January 8 reflected a broad-based
decision by the people of Sri Lanka to improve relations with
the international community, to strengthen democracy and human
rights, to reinforce civil society, and to really put Sri Lanka
on a path toward a process of reconciliation that can yield a
unified peaceful country. If confirmed, Mr. Chairman, I would
work very hard toward helping the people of Sri Lanka to
achieve that vision. Secretary Kerry was in Sri Lanka on May 2,
and he spoke very eloquently about the United States desire to
help the Sri Lankan people with this.
Obviously, the politics in any democracy are going to be
robust and at times messy. There is a lot that needs to be
worked out. There are some significant issues that have stemmed
from three decades of conflict and post-conflict period. But I
think that the United States can be a good friend to the
efforts and the vision of the people of Sri Lanka and really
contribute to the achievement of that vision. And if confirmed,
I look forward to adding my energy to that.
Senator Risch. We appreciate that.
Regarding the Maldives, you made brief reference to the
fact that there is this growing extremism in the country.
Recent media reports indicate that about 200 of the young
people there are radicals who have left and gone to fight with
ISIS. For a small country like that, 200 is a pretty
substantial number, particularly in light of the fact that if
that is what it is, it is usually underreported. So it is
probably higher than that.
What are your thoughts on that?
Mr. Keshap. Mr. Chairman, it is a matter of concern. And we
have an ongoing conversation with the Maldives about this issue
and others.
From my perspective, I think that what we want to do is try
to encourage the people of Maldives and the Government of
Maldives to ensure greater freedoms and democracy for their
people. That is the key to ensuring stability, to attracting
quality investment, to ensuring economic growth, to giving
people opportunity, and hopefully also to countering violent
extremism. This is an issue that is very much on the radar, and
I appreciate your perspectives on this as well. And if
confirmed, I would work very hard with the Government of the
Maldives and with partners in the United States who work on
countering violent extremism to address this issue.
Senator Risch. Thank you very much. Appreciate that.
Ms. Teplitz, we both made reference in our previous
comments to the donor coordination. Tell me a little bit about
your thoughts in a little more detail how you plan to attack
that.
Ms. Teplitz. Thank you, Senator.
I think the donor coordination issue is actually one of the
most critical for the success of our programs and assistance to
the Nepalese people in this recovery phase. My colleague,
Ambassador Bodde, has been leading the donor coordination
effort in Kathmandu, and if confirmed, that is something that I
intend to do as well. And I think it is essential for the
United States to be in front of that effort, both with
bilateral donors and multilateral donors, to ensure that
assistance is well targeted, not duplicative, and well aligned
with the needs of the people of Nepal.
Senator Risch. Have you found that the people of Nepal are
open to the U.S. assistance in that regard as far as donor
coordination is concerned?
Ms. Teplitz. Sir, my understanding through consultations is
that we have a very excellent relationship with the government,
with other actors, civil society, nongovernmental
organizations. We have had a very productive relationship
there, and I see no reason why that would change and look
forward, in fact, if confirmed, to engaging in a dialogue with
an array of people to best serve the people of Nepal.
Senator Risch. Thank you. Appreciate that.
Ms. Gwaltney, the country you are going to is an
interesting country. And of course, they have the tremendous
influence of Russia because of the years that they spent there
under their thumb.
Tell me a little bit. The fact that we have withdrawn from
the Manas Air Base and the fact that the Chinese are attempting
to increase their influence there--what are your thoughts on
our prospects for hanging onto our ability to exert hopefully
some U.S. influence there?
Ms. Gwaltney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And I agree with your assessment that the Kyrgyz Republic
is located at the intersection of many challenges.
First, I would like to state that we are grateful to the
Kyrgyz people for the Manas transit center and for the support
that they provided to the ISAF forces in Afghanistan. It was
never intended to be a permanent facility, and we cooperated
very closely with the Kyrgyz Government for an orderly
transition to that facility.
More broadly, Senator, to your question about regional
influence of Russia and China, for the most part Chinese
influence is economic. China is Kyrgyzstan's largest trading
partner, and it has made clear that it has an interest in
expanding trade and expanding linkages throughout the region.
There may be some complementarities between the Chinese view
and our view on the importance of increasing economic linkages
among the countries of Central Asia and between the countries
of Central Asia and other regions.
With regard to Russia, it is true that the Kyrgyz Republic
and Russia have a shared history. They have a number of
economic linkages. But as recent as the April bilateral
consultations that we had with the Kyrgyz Government here in
Washington, the Kyrgyz made clear to us their interest in
having a strong and productive relationship with us. We think
it is very important that Kyrgyzstan have the space to make its
own decisions about its political autonomy, about its economic
linkages, about the future of the country. We do not think that
it is appropriate for any country to impose a zero sum approach
on the Kyrgyz. We think the Kyrgyz should have the right to
make decisions for themselves. And if confirmed, Senator, I
intend to work very hard to deepen and expand our cooperation
with the Kyrgyz Republic.
Senator Risch. Thank you.
Finally, Mr. Hale, tell me a little bit about the
relationship between the Special Rep for Afghanistan and
Pakistan and the Assistant for South and Central Asia and
yourself. How do the three of you work as far as that country
is concerned? We know the complexity of it, and as I said,
those of us who met with the Members of Parliament here in
April were impressed with their stated purposes. But tell me
how the three of you work in that regard?
Ambassador Hale. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I have, obviously, just begun my consultations. I am still
serving at the embassy in Beirut. But if confirmed, I look
forward to a very close working relationship with both the
Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia and the Special
Representative.
I myself served as a special envoy. So I can stress from
firsthand experience the importance that there be very much a
whole-of-government approach to any problem that a special
envoy is focused on. A special envoy representative brings a
higher level of focus and energy to a particular issue, but
success very much depends upon a cooperative relationship with
all of the entities in the government, including the Assistant
Secretary, for watching the bilateral relationships and the
geopolitical and strategic picture in the region.
As Ambassador to Pakistan, if confirmed, I would report to
the Special Representative and to the Secretary of State
ultimately, but I expect very close integration with the
Bureau.
Senator Risch. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
Senator Murphy.
Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Welcome
to all of you. I am sorry that I missed the very beginning of
your opening remarks.
Ambassador Hale, thank you for your service after very
difficult and tumultuous service in Beirut. I am glad that you
are going to get a few years off in Islamabad. I do not know
how you managed that, but we are grateful that you accepted the
appointment.
We are having a debate here about what constitutes our
national security budget. Right now, there is a proposal that
the Senate and the House exceed the budget caps for the Defense
Department, but that we do not exceed the caps for other
spending that many of us would consider to be instrumental to
national security. On that list would be our foreign assistance
programs.
One of the most important jobs you are going to have is to
oversee the implementation of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman act. Can
you give us your understanding as to the update of its
implementation? I know a little bit of a rocky start in terms
of getting the money to the right partners on the ground. But
how important is that program, is that funding stream to our
ability to influence events on the ground inside Pakistan
today?
Ambassador Hale. Well, I think it has proven to be
critically important. Obviously, our primary goal is to enhance
Pakistan's cooperation with us in the counterterrorism field.
But I think we have all learned over time that simply relying
and focusing on a traditional military-to-military assistance
approach is not going to get the full results that we require.
Pakistan needs to have stability. It needs to have a government
that is addressing the needs of its people. It needs to ensure
that the citizenry can turn to the traditional leaders for
energy, for education, for all of the things that countries
expect to receive from their state. This is a challenge in
Pakistan. It is a poor country. It is an emerging democracy.
But the resources that the Kerry-Lugar-Berman process has
brought to Pakistan I think have shown results already. They
are focused in several key areas. I mentioned energy, but also
education, economic growth, health. And a very important
category is stabilization so that when Pakistan is clearing out
certain areas, like they are today in North Waziristan, of
insurgents, that there is an ability and resources to rush in
in that golden hour with the kind of services that citizens
expect.
Also, I think there is an important point to bear in mind.
This relationship serves best our two sides when it is
predictable, when the Pakistanis and the Americans who are
looking at this relationship can see for years out what the
expectations are, what the deliveries will be. And I think for
Pakistan to sustain what we feel they must for their interests
and ours in terms of security cooperation, it is critical that
we be helping them in these developmental fields as well.
Senator Murphy. We watched video and reports yesterday of
Taliban attacks on the Parliament building in Kabul. Very
disturbing to watch. There are other advancements that the
Taliban has made, taking control of several towns in the north
and in the west. And yet, there are also reports of the
facilitation of a dialogue between the Taliban and the Afghan
Government.
So let me ask a specific question. What is your
understanding today of the disposition of ISI with respect to
its coordination with some of these elements within
Afghanistan? I know we have made a lot of progress there and
there were reports of commitments made in Secretary Kerry's
last bilateral meetings with respect to the Haqqani network I
know separate and aside from some of the issues surrounding the
Taliban. But as the situation seems to get more unstable inside
Afghanistan, are the Pakistanis able to help us try to address
some of those security concerns inside Afghanistan?
Ambassador Hale. Well, Senator, this is a crucial area. It
will be one that I will be very much focused on if I am
confirmed.
I do think that there has been progress. We have seen, I
think, a change in direction by the Pakistani leadership
itself. There are opportunities posed by the election of
President Ghani in Afghanistan, the emergence of new leaders in
Pakistan. And they are talking and beginning to coordinate a
strategy.
In May of this year, we saw that Prime Minister Sharif and
President Ghani met, and they pledged joint efforts to crack
down on the very groups that you have mentioned based in each
state's territory. And they are talking about coordinate
operations that will be undertaken to basically eliminate these
safe havens along the border area.
Obviously, words are one thing. What we need to see beyond
these commitments, important as they are, is actual action on
the ground and effective steps to be taken. And I think that
that is something we will be, obviously, pressing for, in
addition to targeting the militant groups, pushing them and
pressurizing them into the political reconciliation process
that ultimately is the best means for stabilizing Afghanistan.
Senator Murphy. To Ms. Teplitz and Mr. Keshap, the same
question. You are going to be in countries that have to balance
themselves between two great powers, between China and India.
Could you just speak to what the U.S. interests are with
respect to which way those two countries lean or attack? Why
would we care about the direction of either of those countries
is having in terms of trying to manage their alliances with
those two countries? Mr. Keshap first and then Ms. Teplitz.
Mr. Keshap. Sure. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
I think the overarching U.S. goal is to try to help the Sri
Lankan people strengthen their democracy to the greatest extent
possible. By doing that and by fostering the real culture of
accountability and meaningful reconciliation for the past, it
can lay the foundations for a really prosperous and unified
democracy going forward that can be a real platform for
stability not only in its region, in the Indian Ocean region,
but across the Indo-Pacific.
I do believe that America's most enduring partnerships are
with democracies, and so if confirmed, I would very much want
to direct my energies and efforts and those of my team toward
intensifying the U.S. bilateral relationship in a way that is
helpful and relevant to the people----
Senator Murphy. So you are saying let us just focus on the
quality of democracy, or is that a way of saying we should be
agnostic as to the question of their balance of allegiance
between China and India?
Mr. Keshap. Senator, I think the issue here is to make sure
that Sri Lanka can be a robust and contributing partner to
security in the Indian Ocean. And in that regard, they
obviously will need to make their own choices, but I do feel
that the United States should always be the preferred partner
in advancing democratic values, rules-based order, transparent
norms, and peaceful settlement of disputes. And I do think we
can work in concert with democracies in advancing those
strategic goals.
Senator Murphy. Ms. Teplitz.
Ms. Teplitz. Thank you, Senator.
And while I echo many of the sentiments of my colleague
here about the situation with Nepal, I think the U.S. interests
are for a prosperous and stable South Asia. Nepal is a part of
and a partner in achieving that. It does have to balance its
two neighbors, China and India, as you have pointed out. And I
think our role in that is ensuring at this stage that there are
positive and coordinated contributions to the earthquake
recovery effort. This actually gives us an opportunity to work
very closely not only with the Government of Nepal, with whom
we have a very strong relationship, but also with these
neighbors to have a very productive outcome and what happens on
the ground in Kathmandu is going to be crucial in contributing
toward a positive outcome. And if confirmed, I definitely plan
to make this careful balance a priority.
Senator Murphy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Risch. Thank you. I have a hard stop and I have to
go to another meeting. But I wanted to give Senator Shaheen a
chance to ask questions and also, Senator Murphy, if you have
any more questions. If not, if you would close the meeting for
me when we are done.
The record will remain open until close of business on
Thursday for questions. So we will put that into the record.
With that, Senator Murphy, I am going to turn this over to
you and Senator Shaheen for questions.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you all for your willingness to continue to
serve. For many of you, you have served for many years, and we
very much appreciate that.
I want to pick up, Ambassador Hale, where Senator Murphy
left off in terms of the renewed efforts to improve
negotiations with Afghanistan and Pakistan and the possibility
that that might help with moving the dialogue with the Taliban
and hopefully moving towards peace. Can you talk a little bit
about what your assessment is of whether they are making
progress and whether you see the potential and what the United
States can do to help with that effort?
Ambassador Hale. I think it is at an early stage, frankly,
to make sweeping judgments, but it does appear that they are on
the right path. President Ghani's commitment is very clear. He
is staking a lot on this. It is going to require cooperation
from Pakistan, and I think, again, Prime Minister Sharif has
made the right commitments, said the right words. It has been
followed up by travel by General Rahil, the military chief of
staff, and by intelligence officers as well.
There has to be actually, as I said earlier, actions that
follow up on these commitments, and so we will be judging that.
Will there be actions against the safe havens? Will they be
cutting off the terrorist financing links? Will they be really
putting their influence behind the effort to do what you just
said, to encourage meaningful participation in the Afghan-led
reconciliation process?
We have talked about this for a while. I think that there
is a new opportunity here and a new atmosphere because these
are new leaders who are doing this. And I think that the fact
that Pakistan itself has suffered so greatly from terrorist
attacks, most recently the tragedy in Peshawar, also the
Karachi airport attack, that may have contributed to the shift
and understanding that Pakistan's national security interests
really are at stake here and that the stability and the
security and building a democracy in Afghanistan is every bit
as important to the people of Pakistan as it is to those in
Afghanistan.
All I can say, Senator, is that if confirmed, my job will
be primarily to focus on this endeavor, given the stakes for
the United States here, and I will put my full effort behind
that.
Senator Shaheen. And do you see, as Prime Minister Sharif
has taken over, any progress on the effort to be more inclusive
in Pakistan to reduce what we would call hate crimes in the
United States against people who are against non-Muslims?
Ambassador Hale. I believe I will have to get out there
myself, if I am confirmed, and make a judgment and come back to
you and your staff. But there is a long way to go. So I hope
democracy will be more inclined to be respectful of minorities
and of its people. I do not know for sure, but you look at the
record, and there is, as I said, a tremendous task ahead.
Religious minorities, women, other vulnerable segments of that
society definitely need protection, and the United States needs
to stand up, speak loudly about that, but also work behind the
scenes with quiet diplomacy so that Pakistan's elected leaders
understand what is at stake here and also to use the tools in
our assistance program, which Congress has been so generous in
providing so that NGOs and other groups are able to provide all
kinds of programs, can help not just with protections but to
advance recognition of the importance of the rights of
minorities.
Senator Shaheen. I visited in Pakistan several years ago
right after they had gone into the Swat Valley and were
responding to terrorist attacks there and was very impressed
with the effort of the government and the military to take on--
really to fight against their own citizens to address the
terrorism threat. But recent reports have suggested that those
efforts have been less successful than I certainly would have
hoped based on that effort several years ago. And I wonder if
you have any reports on the commitment there and the extent to
which the military has been able to take on some of these
terrorist elements.
Ambassador Hale. Well, again, I think it is important to
remember the context, which is that Pakistanis themselves are
suffering greatly from the attacks and threats posed by these
groups. That is point one.
Point two. I think any rational analyst of Pakistan and the
situation there would recognize that tolerating one group of
extremists or insurgents on your soil while just targeting
another group is not going to create a stable environment at
all. So that is, I think, a very important lesson for any
leader in that region to understand.
Third, I think it is important to remember where the
successes have been. Pakistan's military leadership and its
soldiers have done admirable work in countering the al-Qaeda
threat and doing maximum effort to eliminate that. Always gaps,
but there have been arrests. There have been some substantial
activities. Countering IED's is another area where they export
the manufacture and the export of these IED's into Afghanistan.
Wrapping that up, again not completed, but substantial efforts
have been invested in that.
Working on these areas of insurgents and militants is the
next big project, and obviously, there has been progress. I do
not have the firsthand experience that you have, Senator, in
observing this. I am concerned by your observation and I will
want to look into that myself when I get out there. But right
now, the campaign in North Waziristan has produced results. It
has cleared out substantial areas. It is soaking up safe
havens. It is critically important that other groups not come
in now and exploit those areas and that the state remain
present not just with the constabulary in the army but, as I
said earlier in response to a question, that the whole of
government is rushing in there and providing the services and
the economy that any Pakistani should expect of their
government.
Thank you.
Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Murphy [presiding]. Thank you, Senator.
I just have two more questions.
Ambassador Hale, there are different reports about the
effectiveness of ISIS in establishing a foothold within
Pakistan. Many suggest that there is a lot of factors that are
going to inhibit their ability to grow more than a handful of
activists there.
What is your understanding heading into Islamabad as to how
much time you might be spending on this question of ISIS
presence inside Pakistan?
Ambassador Hale. Well, again, I will need to get there, if
I am confirmed, to judge for myself. But the briefings I have
had suggest that so far the ISIS threat is relatively small and
contained. But having served, as I have, so many years in the
Levant, complacency is the last thing I am taking with me to
Pakistan on this front. ISIS has shown that it is potent and it
can exploit areas that are ungoverned quite rapidly, and we all
know there are ungoverned spaces in Pakistan. So while there
may be cultural and other factors that have reduced ISIS's
ability at least initially to make inroads, I think we have to
be very vigilant about that and make sure that the Pakistani
leadership knows, as I think those in the Levant do, that
moderate Muslim leaders themselves are the first targets of
this phenomenon and therefore have an extra responsibility to
preempt them.
Senator Murphy. Ms. Gwaltney, should we care about the
Kyrgyz Republic's joining the Eurasian Union? Is this an
economic body that presents any kind of real threat to the
United States without membership on the western edge of Russia?
Is this something that you think you are going to be spending
time on, or should we just let it lie and not worry too much
about it?
Ms. Gwaltney. Thank you, Senator, for you question.
The Kyrgyz Republic is poised to join the Eurasian Economic
Union in the upcoming weeks. And one thing that we have made
very clear is, of course, first and foremost, our support for
free trade, and secondly, equally importantly, is the fact that
as a member of the WTO--and the Kyrgyz Republic was the first
former Soviet Republic to join the WTO in 1998--but that in its
accession to the Eurasian Economic Union, the Kyrgyz Republic
needs to be mindful and to uphold its obligations under the
WTO.
I think it is early days, sir, to be able to calibrate
exactly what the economic impact of accession to this
organization will be, but if confirmed, it is certainly
something that I will pay a great deal of attention to not only
because of Kyrgyzstan's WTO commitments but because I am
committed to the promotion of American exports and support for
American business. And we will want to keep that space open.
Senator Murphy. Well, thank you to you all. I am tempted to
ask my staff to do some quick research on what parliamentary
maneuvers I can use now that I am in charge of the
subcommittee. [Laughter.]
But instead, I will just note that the record does stand
open. So if you do get followup questions from members of the
subcommittee who are not here, I hope you will turn them around
quickly.
And with that, using bottled water, this hearing is now
adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:15 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Glyn Townsend Davies, nominated to be Ambassador to the
Kingdom of Thailand, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate davies's responses
to questions from senator rubio
Question. If the Thai junta by the start of 2016 fails to remove
restrictions on freedom of speech and assembly, and schedule elections,
what steps do you think are appropriate to increase pressure on General
Prayuth? Do you think it's appropriate to cancel the military exercises
known as Cobra Gold? Why not? If Cobra Gold was to continue in 2016, do
you agree that it should be kept at a scaled-back level, or scaled back
even further?
Answer. Following the coup, we suspended, as required by law, $4.7
million in military assistance funds (FMF, IMET, PKO) until a
democratically elected civilian government takes office. We have also
cancelled some high-level engagements, military exercises, and training
programs with the military and police. We continue to thoroughly review
all our engagements with Thailand. If confirmed, I will closely monitor
political developments and continue actively to urge the military
government to remove restrictions on civil liberties and return
Thailand to democratic governance as soon as possible. I will also
encourage the military government to make the political reform process
as inclusive as possible to reflect the broad diversity of views within
the country.
The United States decided to proceed with Cobra Gold 2015 because
of the importance of the annual, multilateral exercise in fulfilling
the U.S. commitment to regional stability. Bringing together nearly 30
nations, Cobra Gold is the largest such exercise in Asia and has for 30
years been an integral part of the U.S. commitment to strengthen our
security engagement in the region. Cancelling the exercise would make
it more challenging to sustain our military's interoperability with
regional allies and partners.
Cobra Gold 2015 was significantly refocused and scaled down in
light of the Thai military's ouster of the civilian government, with an
increased focus on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief. We have
decided to proceed with planning for Cobra Gold 2016 due to its
importance in expanding regional cooperation and capacity building. As
in 2015, the exercise will be scaled down and focus on building
regional cooperation on humanitarian assistance and disaster relief.
If confirmed, I will evaluate the scale and focus of the exercise
and seek necessary adjustments in light of political developments in
Thailand.
Question. Will you continue to use public diplomacy, as the State
Department has since the May 2014 coup, to raise concerns about
censorship and arrests of Thai citizens for exercising their rights to
free speech and assembly?
Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue to urge Thailand, both
publicly and privately, to remove undue restrictions on civil
liberties, including limits on fundamental freedoms of expression and
peaceful assembly. My priority will be to urge Thailand to institute a
genuinely inclusive reform process that reflects the broad diversity of
views within the country. As part of this effort, I will continue to
use all tools at our disposal, including public diplomacy and
diplomatic engagement, to encourage Thailand to lift restrictions on
civil liberties and swiftly return to a democratically elected civilian
government that respects human rights.
Question. Thailand was designated a Tier 3 country for trafficking
in persons in the State Department's 2014 Trafficking in Persons
Report. What new ideas do you have for motivating the Thai Government
to get serious about cracking down on human trafficking--not just with
isolated raids and written action plans, but serious, sustained, and
comprehensive efforts to clamp down on trafficking networks--not just
sex trafficking but trafficking of migrant labor and refugees from
Burma?
Answer. If confirmed, my arrival as the new Ambassador will provide
a fresh opportunity for the United States to highlight both publicly
and privately our principled stance against human trafficking.
Thailand's Tier 3 ranking in 2014 reflected the shortcomings in the
Thai Government's efforts to address the country's vast human
trafficking problem. In the 2014 TIP Report, we outlined a series of
recommendations for the Thai Government to improve its antitrafficking
response.
If confirmed, I will encourage Thailand to conduct thorough
investigations of reports of trafficking, including in cases with
alleged government complicity, and to bring trafficking offenders to
justice. I will also continue to advocate for proactive government
efforts to identify and protect victims, and support international and
civil society organizations that play a role in identifying and
assisting victims and promoting the rights of migrant workers.
The Department's TIP Office currently provides approximately $1
million in funding for three projects in Thailand that are focused on
trafficking prevention, protection for victims, raising awareness,
promoting access to justice for victims, and increasing investigations
and prosecutions of traffickers. Additional project funding for FY15 is
currently under consideration.
We will continue to provide specific technical assistance requested
by the Thai Government related to trafficking investigations and
prosecutions as well as general support for building the capacity of
their law enforcement and rule of law institutions. We welcome the
efforts made by Thailand to stand up a Human Trafficking in Persons
Division in the criminal courts system that will focus exclusively on
human trafficking cases. We also welcome reports that the Royal Thai
Police has issued over 100 arrest warrants related to migrant smuggling
and abuses against migrants--which may include human trafficking,
including the warrant for a three-star Army official.
If confirmed, I will continue to encourage Thailand to take robust
action to combat human trafficking and eliminate forced labor.
Question. What role do you see for the private sector--for U.S.
companies and Thai companies--in fighting the use of forced labor in
Thailand?
Answer. The private sector has a key role to play in combating the
use of forced labor in Thailand. A significant proportion of
trafficking victims in Thailand are found in the seafood industry. For
several years, the international community has expressed its concern
over the forced labor of foreign migrants in the Thai fishing and
onland seafood industries. The United States continues to call on the
Thai Government to take significantly greater steps to protect foreign
migrants in the fishing and shrimp industries and to punish those who
are enslaving foreign workers.
Thailand is the world's third-largest seafood exporter and its
products are sold at major retailers around the world. As a result,
U.S. and Thai retailers have significant economic influence over the
Thai seafood industry and play a vital role in ensuring that supply
chains are free from the use of forced labor.
Recently, several large U.S. retailers have engaged major Thai
seafood producers to address issues in their supply chain in an effort
to combat human trafficking in Thailand's seafood sector. If confirmed,
I will encourage private companies to comprehensively address forced
labor in their supply chains and help bring together various
stakeholders to develop concrete action plans to address this important
issue.
__________
Responses of William A. Heidt, Nominated to be Ambassador to the
Kingdom of Cambodia, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate heidt's responses
to questions from senator rubio
Question. If you are confirmed, the most important event that is
going to take place during your tenure is the 2018 elections. Are you
prepared to be as outspoken as your predecessor, Bill Todd, in publicly
criticizing human rights abuses and restrictions on freedom of speech
and assembly, and calling out politically motivated misuses of power
for what they are? Do you agree that public diplomacy--and outspoken
defense of human rights principles--is an important and ultimately
essential diplomatic tool in the Cambodia context?
Answer. The 2018 elections will certainly be an important event for
Cambodia and represents an opportunity for it to take another step
forward toward an enduring and principled democracy. If confirmed, I
will advocate both publically and privately for the Cambodian
Government to stage free and fair elections, including a free election
campaign period in which human rights and the freedoms of speech and
assembly are respected. I will also urge and offer assistance to the
government to address the irregularities, including voter registration
issues, which marked the last election. Public diplomacy is also an
important tool, and we will use it, along with other programs including
direct diplomacy with government officials and the opposition, targeted
assistance aimed at strengthening Cambodia's democratic institutions
and people-to-people programs that impart American values to
Cambodians. Ambassador Todd has been a tireless advocate for human
rights and democracy in Cambodia. If confirmed, I will continue in that
tradition.
Question. Do you agree that the 1991 Paris Agreements remain
binding and that the United States, as a signatory, continues to have
specific obligations to promote democracy and human rights in Cambodia,
pursuant to the agreement's terms?
Answer. The United States, both as a signatory to the 1991 Paris
Peace Accords and as a matter of principle, places democracy and human
rights promotion as one of our top foreign policy goals in Cambodia. If
confirmed, I will continue to support the wide variety of programs that
help build a stronger civil society, will continue to emphasize the
importance of democracy and human rights with both the government and
opposition, and will continue to promote educational and cultural
exchanges which expose young Cambodians to American values.
Question. The Cambodian Parliament, in the control of Prime
Minister Hun Sen, is currently considering a troublingly restrictive
new law governing nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). If that law
passes in current form, will you work to ensure that the government
does not abuse or misuse it to harass or persecute NGOs for their
legitimate operations, including reporting and advocacy on human rights
issues?
Answer. We are very concerned about the draft NGO law. We have
spoken out publicly about the law on a number of occasions and have
questioned the need for such a far-reaching law. Our Embassy in Phnom
Penh continues to lobby the Cambodian Government to pursue full
consultations with civil society as the draft law is debated in the
National Assembly. If the law passes in its current form, if confirmed,
I would closely monitor the treatment of all NGOs, international and
domestic, to ensure that the new law is not used to suppress their
rights of freedom of association, assembly, and speech. As appropriate,
we will also share best practices from the U.S. and other countries on
regulating the NGO sector in a way that facilitates the empowerment of
civil society while addressing any concerns the government may have
about terrorism or coordination between NGOs and the government. Any
NGO law should have a light touch and require minimal governmental
oversight so that civil society can flourish and play its essential
role in a transparent, rights-respecting democracy.
__________
Responses of David Hale, Nominated to be Ambassador to the Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate hale's responses
to questions from senator cardin
Question. I have ongoing concerns about Lashkar-e-Taiba and the
threat that it poses to the region. I hope that we will see some
progress in countering this group and progress in holding its members
accountable for the 2008 tragedy in Mumbai. How will you specifically
increase pressure on the Pakistani Government to take action against
LeT and its counterpart organization Jamaat-ud-Dawa?
Answer. I share your concerns regarding Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and
believe it is critical that the Mumbai trial move forward and that the
Government of Pakistan take steps to dismantle LeT. Pakistan's
relations with India will continue to be challenged as long as LeT
continues to retain any operational capacity. I understand that this
issue has been raised specifically by senior officials in this
administration, and if confirmed, I absolutely plan to continue our
efforts to engage the Pakistani Government.
Question. Several international NGOs have faced challenges in
legally registering in Pakistan. Over the past week, Save the Children
has been ordered to leave, only to have that order rescinded. This
uncertainty has made it very difficult for these organizations to work
in what is already a challenging environment. This is unacceptable.
Pakistan needs to understand that undue pressure on these organizations
and civil society more broadly will have significant implications for
our bilateral relationship. How will you protect the interests of U.S.-
funded NGOs in Pakistan?
Answer. The work of international and local NGOs to carry out their
development objectives is critical to achieving Pakistan's and our own
goals that we have agreed upon with the Government of Pakistan. We
respect the Government of Pakistan's need for transparency from INGOs
involving their activities within the country. We also agree INGOs must
operate within a relevant legal and regulatory framework. However, if
confirmed, I will continue to urge the Government of Pakistan to
establish a transparent and credible process that will allow INGOs,
including Save the Children, to work in Pakistan legally.
Question. What are the most important actions you have taken in
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What is the
impact of your actions? Why were your actions significant?
Answer. During my assignments as Ambassador to Jordan and Lebanon,
I took specific steps to promote democratic institutions, including
through promoting political reforms and elections in Jordan with U.S.
Government programming, and by taking active steps to strengthen
democratic institutions and civil society in both countries.
Question. What are the most pressing human rights issues in
Pakistan? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if
confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Pakistan? What do
you hope to accomplish through these actions?
Answer. As noted in our previously published Human Rights Reports,
the most serious human rights problems in Pakistan remain attacks on
religious minorities, extrajudicial killings, disappearances, torture,
poor implementation and enforcement of laws, gender-based violence,
violence against journalists and media organizations, governmental
practices and laws which limit freedom of religion (particularly for
religious minorities), a weak criminal justice system, widespread
forced and exploitative child labor, and human trafficking. I believe
that our ongoing rule of law programming in Pakistan has the potential
to strengthen the capacity of Pakistani police, prosecutors, and
courts--as well as strengthen their relationships with civil society--
and is one of the most effective tools we have to promote and protect
basic human rights and counter attacks on all Pakistani citizens,
including minorities. Our democracy and human rights programming is
also very important, especially our support to Pakistani elections and
for improving journalist standards and increasing media safety. If
confirmed, I plan to advocate for these programs and to engage directly
with Pakistani officials on issues of rule of law, democracy, and human
rights.
Question. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
previous response? What challenges will you face in Pakistan in
advancing human rights and democracy in general?
Answer. I will assess the situation on the ground in Pakistan once
I arrive, but I understand that the security environment is a major
challenge to our access to many areas of the country. Moreover, I
understand it often takes time to receive approval for some of our
programs. If confirmed, I plan to engage directly and consistently with
the Government of Pakistan to ensure that we can implement important
rule of law, democracy, and human rights programming.
Question. Are you committed to meeting with human rights and other
nongovernmental organizations in the U.S. and with local human rights
NGOs in Pakistan?
Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to regularly meeting with
human rights and other nongovernmental organizations in the U.S. and
with local human rights NGOs in Pakistan.
Question. If confirmed, please describe steps that you will take to
enhance effective implementation of Section 620M of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known as the Leahy amendment, within
the Embassy as well as steps you would take to accomplish the goal of
the law, namely, helping the Government of Pakistan end impunity for
human rights violations by security forces.
Answer. If confirmed, I will be personally involved in ensuring
robust Leahy vetting occurs, as I have as Ambassador in Lebanon and
Jordan. Furthermore, I plan to ensure that the country team, especially
officers from the Departments of State and Defense, continue their
active engagement in the Leahy vetting process, ensuring that units
which have committed gross violations of human rights do not benefit
from U.S. assistance and also helping the Government of Pakistan
address and prevent human rights violations. Coordination with our
colleagues in Washington will also be critical to ensuring the success
of our vetting process.
__________
ambassador-designate hale's responses
to questions from senator risch
Question. A lot of policy decisions regarding Pakistan are
currently made by the SRAP (Special Representative for Afghanistan and
Pakistan), but the one issue you will be most responsible for is crisis
management if there is some incident like the Raymond Davis case or the
Mumbai attacks. While there are certainly many other scenarios that
could occur, how would you handle these situations?
Answer. I will be absolutely focused on ensuring Embassy Islamabad
and the constituent posts in Pakistan are fully prepared to manage a
crisis, whether related to policy, a terrorist attack, a natural
disaster, or other scenarios, as you rightly note are very possible.
Recognizing that no two situations are identical, I have had
significant crisis management experience in my career, including during
my tenure as Ambassador in Jordan and Lebanon. I understand there is
close coordination between Embassy Islamabad and SRAP, as well as with
other relevant Department of State offices, including Diplomatic
Security, the Office of the Under Secretary for Management, and with
interagency partners, including the National Security Staff and the
Department of Defense. I will prioritize maintaining these
relationships as part of a strong, sustained contingency planning
program. Above all I would use my relationship with senior Pakistani
officials as needed to manage the situation.
If confirmed, I will work assiduously to build upon and strengthen
the critical relationships with the Pakistani leadership that the
current Ambassador and Country Team have established--and to ensure
that the U.S. has the broadest possible set of contacts with senior
Pakistani counterparts that could be drawn upon when needed. Finally, I
would like to note that as I have stressed throughout my remarks, I
believe the best contingency planning with host governments comes
through sustained engagement, and increasing cooperation on areas of
mutual interest. I believe this is the path our relations with Pakistan
are currently on, and I look forward to working to further strengthen
that engagement in support of our national interests.
Question. China is increasingly active in Pakistan, more than they
have ever been. What do you believe is their goal in the Pakistan and
the region? Do you think they will succeed and how would that success
affect the U.S. relationship with Pakistan?
Answer. China and Pakistan have long shared close ties. We and
China share a concern about Pakistan's stability, and wish to see the
elimination of terrorist safe havens and support networks. We also
share a desire to see a Pakistan that is economically stable, which
will require a resolution to Pakistan's long-term energy crisis and an
expansion in Pakistan's regional economic integration with its
neighbors, especially India and Afghanistan. The administration
believes the best approach is to expand engagement with both China and
Pakistan on all issues, and seek to cooperate in areas of common
interest. At a basic level, we do not view Pakistan as a theater for
zero-sum competition between the United States and China. We believe
China's engagement in Pakistan potentially can contribute to peace and
stability in Pakistan and the broader region. This would help to
achieve U.S. national security objectives in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and
the broader region.
Question. What success have we seen come from the Strategic
Dialogue beyond formally banning the Haqqani network from Pakistan?
Answer. The Strategic Dialogue provides a comprehensive framework
for our engagement with Pakistan, ensuring that the issues of most
importance to our two governments are addressed in a significant and
sustained manner, by senior officials from each side. There have been a
number of notable successes: a greater focus on nuclear security and
nonproliferation; progress on countering improvised explosive devices
(``C-IED''); close cooperation on counterterrorism objectives and
delivery of the hardware needed to achieve those objectives; increased
trade, investment opportunities, and reform efforts; improvements in
the energy sector; and greater access to educational opportunities.
However, I would note that the most important outcome of the
Strategic Dialogue, as relaunched by Secretary Kerry in August 2013, is
that it has put the bilateral relationship on a firmer foundation,
grounded in our respective interests, and characterized by a more
regular, forthright exchange of views--often in private. This progress
is carried forward by our daily engagements in Pakistan, involving a
robust Country Team representing the full range of U.S. departments and
agencies.
Question. Can Pakistan truly grow economically and reduce its
dependence on Western aid without a rapprochement with India? How do
you assess the potential?
Answer. We absolutely believe that greater regional trade is
important for the stability, prosperity, and security of the region. We
will continue to encourage India and Pakistan to find ways to increase
trade and cross-border connections. However, Pakistan has a significant
number of domestic reforms that are required to grow its economy,
regardless of its international trade. Many factors, including reform
and energy sector investments can help Pakistan grow economically. This
is why we have supported PM Nawaz Sharif's economic agenda, the
government's engagement with the IMF, and used our assistance funds and
our Strategic Dialogue to promote reform. As a result Pakistan is in
better macroeconomic health than when it began the IMF program.
__________
ambassador-designate hale's responses
to questions from senator rubio
Question. Pakistan is one of the worst violators of religious
freedom in the world, in particular due, to the combination of
government persecution through the blasphemy and anti-Ahmadi laws and
government inaction by not arresting perpetrators of mob violence or
cracking down on militant groups. However, the State Department never
has designated Pakistan as a ``country of particular concern'' for its
particularly severe violations of religious freedom.
How can this be explained?
Answer. Human rights and religious freedom are among our highest
objectives worldwide and in Pakistan. If confirmed, I will plan to
raise these issues at the highest levels of the Pakistani Government
and will use all the tools at my disposal to promote progress in these
areas, recognizing that we also have many other critical foreign policy
objectives in Pakistan. If I am confirmed, once I am in Pakistan I will
make my own assessment of what may be effective and will consult
closely with SRAP, DRL, the Secretary, and others--including Congress--
on any consideration of a CPC designation.
Question. Sadly, no religious community is immune from violence in
Pakistan. Recent months have witnessed an attack on two churches in
Lahore, a brazen attack on the busload of Ismaili Muslims in Karachi,
ongoing violence against Ahmadi Muslims, and targeted attacks against
Shia Muslims. Despite the Pakistani Supreme Court ordering the
government to create special protection forces for religious
minorities, no such actions have been taken.
What will you do to press the Pakistani Government to
better protect religious minorities and crack down on militant
groups that target religious communities? How can the U.S.
Government provide support toward this effort?
Answer. If confirmed, I plan to raise protection for religious
minorities at the highest levels of the Pakistani Government. Our
immediate priority should be to identify the obstacles to improving
religious freedom conditions in Pakistan and think creatively about
ways to work with the Government of Pakistan to change those
circumstances for the better. I believe the U.S. Government should
continue to consult with the Government of Pakistan on how to prevent
further atrocities against religious minorities, including by sharing
information about attacks, designating the leaders of the organizations
as terrorists both domestically and at the U.N., and assisting with
rule of law and investigations training for Pakistani law enforcement
officials.
Question. While Pakistan overwhelmingly meets the country of
particular concern (CPC) threshold, the U.S. Government can take other
steps. For instance, the U.S. Commission on International Religious
Freedom (USCIRF) has recommended that the U.S. Government create a
special bilateral engagement with the Pakistan Minorities Commission
and religious minorities in Parliament. There are other possibilities
for positive engagement, such as training for provincial minority
affairs offices.
What actions will you take to positively engage Pakistan on
these issues? Would you support a special U.S./Pakistan
bilateral engagement around issues of religious tolerance?
Answer. If confirmed, I will look closely at the USCIRF
recommendations. Upon initial review, I see no impediment to
establishing a deeper dialogue with the Government of Pakistan to
explore ways to promote religious freedom and protect religious
minorities. The IRF Act gives us several tools to promote religious
freedom, CPC designations being only one of them. Additional tools
include bilateral and multilateral engagement, denying visas to the
United States to foreign government officials who are responsible for
severe violations of religious freedom, and implementing programming to
promote religious tolerance. The Government of Pakistan has engaged us
more vigorously in the aftermath of the attack on the Army Public
School in Peshawar, the Government of Pakistan has engaged with us on
issues related to countering violent extremism. I believe, given
Pakistan's stated recognition of the threat posed to its citizens by
those who foment sectarian tension, that there is reason to expect
greater cooperation in this critical area.
Question. Pakistan leads the world in jailing people for blasphemy.
According to USCIRF, almost 40 people either are on death row or
serving life sentences for the ``crime'' of blasphemy, a statistic
unmatched anywhere else in the world. People like Aasia Bibi continue
to be jailed, while others are killed by mobs--such as the Christian
couple that was lynched to death in November and their bodies were
thrown into a brick kiln. Pakistanis brave enough to confront blasphemy
risk their lives including Salaman Taseer, Shahbaz Bhatti, and more
recently human rights lawyer Rashid Rehman.
As Pakistan is considering adding much-needed procedural
safeguards to the blasphemy law, how will you work to
proactively encourage Pakistan to see that these changes are
made? How can you press the Pakistanis to arrest and
aggressively prosecute participants in mob violence, as
oftentimes they are charged but never prosecuted?
Answer. The Government of Pakistan's consideration of adding
procedural safeguards to protect against abuse of the blasphemy law is
a positive step, and one that I will support actively in my engagement
with senior Pakistani officials, if confirmed. All too often, the
blasphemy laws are abused by private citizens with other objectives in
mind, such as to gain an advantage in land disputes, or as retribution
for other disputes. I understand that as a matter of current policy, we
regularly express our concerns to Pakistani authorities about the state
of religious freedom in Pakistan. We continue to encourage the
Pakistani Government to repeal the blasphemy law, and to hold
accountable those who commit acts of violence in the name of religion.
The administration urges fair and transparent proceedings where
defendants and lawyers can safely argue their cases.
If confirmed, upon my arrival it will be a personal priority in
Pakistan to see that more can be done to encourage the change that we
seek.
Question. In recent weeks, Pakistan has been taking actions to
heavily regulate NGOs operating in their country, including temporarily
shutting down Save the Children's offices. The government is
considering new NGO law which would require NGOs to operate under the
Ministry of Interior.
If this law is passed, will you work to ensure that the
government does not abuse or misuse it to harass or persecute
NGOs for their legitimate operations, including reporting and
advocacy on human rights issues?
Answer. The work of international and local NGOs to carry out their
development objectives is critical to achieving Pakistan's and our own
goals that we have agreed upon with the Government of Pakistan. NGOs
must operate within the regulations of the host government. If
confirmed, I intend to work with the Government of Pakistan to ensure
that NGOs are able to operate legally and effectively.
__________
Responses of Sheila Gwaltney, Nominated to be Ambassador to the Kyrgyz
Republic, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate gwaltney's responses
to questions from senator risch
Question. U.S. policy has sought to support regional integration as
a way to improve economic success. Given the withdrawal of the U.S.
from Manas Air Base, the deep relationship with Russia, the growing
influence of China in the region, and difficult relations with
neighbors, what prospects do you have for U.S. policy in Kyrgyz
Republic? What can we realistically accomplish?
Answer. Geographic proximity, economic links, and historical ties
give Russia and China strong influence in the region. The Kyrgyz people
have long had complex relationships with both of those nations. We
fully support the aspirations of the Kyrgyz Republic to pursue a
multivector foreign and economic policy, and we do not accept any
assertions that the Kyrgyz Republic must choose between the United
States and Russia or China.
Since Kyrgyzstan's independence nearly 24 years ago, our bilateral
relationship has been based on mutual respect and mutual benefit. The
basis of our engagement is to support a sovereign, independent, stable,
and secure state that has good relations with its neighbors and is able
to provide opportunities for its people. For example, we welcomed the
strong support of the Kyrgyz Republic for the CASA-1000 energy project
as an example of better regional integration and cooperation. As
recently as April bilateral consultations, the Kyrgyz Government has
made clear its strong interest in maintaining a cooperative, productive
relationship with the United States.
U.S. engagement since 1991 has made an important impact on the
Kyrgyz Republic. Our assistance programs have made significant
contributions to help build democratic institutions, to promote
stability and prosperity in the country, to support educational
exchanges, and to enhance opportunities for U.S. businesses through an
improved investment climate.
The Kyrgyz Republic has a talented population with half of its
citizens under the age of 25. Over 1,000 of these young men and women
have traveled to the United States through the Future Leaders Exchange
Program, and many more have experienced the people and values of the
United States through our public diplomacy programs and through
interaction with the over 1,000 Peace Corps Volunteers who have served
in the Kyrgyz Republic. If confirmed, my team and I will work
energetically to strengthen, deepen, and broaden the relationship
between the United States and the Kyrgyz Republic.
Question. While U.S. policy has focused on support for democratic
institutions in the country, how do you see the upcoming parliamentary
elections proceeding? Will we see active participation from civil
society or should we be concerned about undue influence?
Answer. The United States is committed to supporting the Kyrgyz
Republic's continued democratic development. While democracy is broader
than just elections, they are a critical component. We encourage the
Kyrgyz Republic to strengthen its democratic gains by holding free and
fair elections in conformity with international standards. The Kyrgyz
Republic has held three successful national elections since the 2010
revolution--the constitutional referendum in 2010, the parliamentary
elections in 2010, and the Presidential election in 2011. The upcoming
2015 parliamentary election and Presidential elections in 2017 will be
key indicators of the country's democratic progress.
The Kyrgyz Republic has a vibrant civil society, whose active
participation helps reinforce the country's young democracy. In
previous elections, the national NGO Coalition for Democracy and Civil
Society played an exceptional role monitoring the voting process. There
remain, however, significant administrative capacity challenges in the
Kyrgyz Republic's ability to manage elections. If confirmed, I plan to
work closely with civil society and the Kyrgyz Government to assist
that nation to solidify its democratic institutions.
Question. With the drawdown in Afghanistan what concerns do you
have regarding an increase in terrorism and drug trafficking in the
country? Are we seeing an actual increase or is the government
overstating what is occurring?
Answer. As noted in the Department of State's Country Report on
Terrorism, there were no reported terrorist attacks in the Kyrgyz
Republic in 2014, although security forces arrested several individuals
suspected of affiliation with terrorist organizations and terrorist
activities abroad. Drug trafficking routes through Central Asia are a
long-standing concern and, if confirmed, I intend to work with the
Kyrgyz Government and international partners to increase local capacity
and enhance regional cooperation to combat this problem.
Our security cooperation with the Kyrgyz Republic focuses on
enhancing border security, strengthening regional counternarcotics
efforts, countering terrorism and violent extremism, promoting
professional conduct and respect for human rights by security forces,
and working toward a stable, secure Afghanistan. We have developed the
Central Asia Counternarcotics Initiative (CACI) in coordination with
the Drug Enforcement Administration, to intensify efforts against drug
trafficking in the region. Expanding our cooperation in this arena not
only helps the Kyrgyz Republic deal with security challenges, it helps
solidify our diplomatic ties and deepen and broaden our partnerships.
The government of the Kyrgyz Republic is increasingly aware of the
threat of terrorism in the region and the dangers of recruitment of
Kyrgyz citizens by violent extremist organizations. The Kyrgyz
Republicsent a high-level delegation to attend the White House summit
on countering violent extremism in February. With respect to
Afghanistan, in April 2015, a U.S interagency Afghanistan Briefing Team
traveled to the Kyrgyz Republic to share assessments and explore
avenues for better cooperation with top officials in the Kyrgyz
Government. The Kyrgyz Government has voiced its support for the
current Afghan Government and has embraced the CASA-1000 project that
is planned to supply electricity in support of Afghanistan's
development.
__________
Responses of Atul Keshap, Nominated to be Ambassador to the Democratic
Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka and to the Republic of Maldives, to
Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate keshap's responses
to questions from senator cardin
Question. What is the extent of U.S. security cooperation with Sri
Lanka? What are the specific conditions under which the U.S. would
enhance our security relationship with Sri Lanka? What specific
progress on accountability and reconciliation will the U.S. require
from the Sri Lankans before moving forward on the security
relationship?
Answer. U.S. security assistance for Sri Lanka remains limited by
the policies that were in place during the previous government and
focuses on four areas key to our national interests: maritime security,
disaster response, peacekeeping training, and educational support.
Examples include the provision of demining equipment and training to
help clear mines remaining after the civil war. For the expenditure of
approximately $500,000 in the last year, Sri Lankan students have
attended courses including International Law of Military Operations,
Gender-Based Violence and Women's Health, Law of Armed Conflict and
Human Rights, Legal Aspects of Combating Corruption, and Approaches for
the Re-integration of Ex-Combatants.
We can envision benefits to both our countries, and to peace and
security in the Indo-Pacific region as a result of a strengthened
military relationship contingent upon progress on accountability, human
rights, and reconciliation. Future security assistance and programming
will be greatly influenced by successful initiatives to credibly hold
individuals accountable for human rights violations or violations of
international humanitarian law as well as greater institutional
reforms. We will continue to vet those security force units that seek
U.S. assistance, and consistent with U.S. law and policy, we will not
provide assistance to a unit if we have credible information that it
committed a gross violation of human rights.
If confirmed, I will continue to urge reforms to ensure the Sri
Lanka military functions as a professional and accountable peacetime
force, dedicated to human rights, rule of law, and democracy.
Question. What are the obstacles to reaching reconciliation with
Tamil communities in Sri Lanka? How might the United States best assist
in this process? Do you support the release of the UNHRC on war crimes
in Sri Lanka report this year?
Answer. Reconciliation will not happen all at once; it requires
time and concrete actions. The current situation in Sri Lanka developed
over 30 years of conflict and several difficult post-conflict years.
The Sirisena government is working to restore mutual trust and
confidence, for the benefit of all Sri Lankans of all ethnicities and
religions. For the sake of future peace and prosperity, it is vitally
important to get this right.
The Sirisena government has made a public commitment to take
credible steps to promote justice, accountability, and reconciliation
in relation to human rights abuses and conflict-related crimes. Such
processes are never easy, but the United States will continue to
support credible efforts to address these important and difficult
issues in a way that facilitates reconciliation as well as a durable
and lasting peace for the Sri Lankan people.
We support the release of the U.N. investigation's report as part
of building a peaceful, prosperous, inclusive Sri Lanka. Our assistance
program over the last 5 years has sought to strengthen the
participation of Tamil and other minority and marginalized communities.
Moving forward, our expanding program would continue those efforts,
including through economic empowerment, strengthening civil society,
fostering inclusion of diverse religious and community leaders, and
helping support the rule of law.
Question. Democratic backsliding in the Maldives is very concerning
and is potentially damaging to the U.S.-Maldives bilateral relationship
including military to military activities. How will you emphasize the
importance of the rule of law in the Maldives? What levers does the
United States have to encourage a more democratic course in the
country?
Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to express our government's
concern at the lack of appropriate criminal procedures during recent
trials of political figures, including reports that the trials fell
well short of Maldivian and international standards for due process. We
are also concerned about actions that undermine democratic institutions
and fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of expression and
assembly.
If confirmed, I would work with the government, civil society
groups, and international partners to urge the Maldivian Government to
uphold its commitments to rule of law, democratic principles, and human
rights.
Question. What are the most important actions you have taken in
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What is the
impact of your actions? Why were your actions significant?
Answer. I place the highest emphasis on advancing American values
of human rights, religious freedom, and democracy. As human rights
officer at our Embassy in Morocco early in my career, I learned how
crucial it is to help ensure strong protections for religious and
ethnic minorities and NGO and political activists.
In assignments working on South Asia spanning the past decade, I
engaged with governments across the region to urge greater protection
for women, religious minorities, civil society, human rights defenders,
and labor rights activists, and worked to raise awareness of the
perniciousness of trafficking in persons.
While progress in these areas can be slow, I am most gratified by
efforts undertaken by the United States, including at the United
Nations in Geneva, to highlight the need for a credible process of
reconciliation in Sri Lanka.
As Office Director for U.N. Human Rights from 2008-2010, as Office
Director for Sri Lanka 2010-2012, and as Deputy Assistant Secretary for
South Asia, 2013 to present, I contributed to efforts by the U.S. and
other countries to highlight this matter in the U.N. Human Rights
Council, including the passage of three important resolutions on Sri
Lanka.
The political transition brought about by the January election has
provided the opportunity for Sri Lanka to achieve enduring peace and
prosperity, and true reconciliation if the government continues to
advance democracy, human rights, accountability and political
inclusion.
If confirmed, I would strive fully to advance the cause of
democracy and human rights in Sri Lanka and Maldives.
Question. What are the most pressing human rights issues in Sri
Lanka and Maldives? What are the most important steps you expect to
take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Sri Lanka
and Maldives? What do you hope to accomplish through these actions?
Answer. We want to help the Sri Lankan people strengthen democracy,
civil society, and human rights, including freedom of expression and
freedom of religion or belief. We want to help build a lasting peace
and fellowship among Sri Lanka's ethnic and religious communities,
including credible justice, accountability, and reconciliation that can
facilitate closure for those who suffered and lost loved ones during
the war.
It is important to get this right, and the U.N. and international
community can lend useful insight to the efforts of the Sri Lankan
people. We would assess how best to focus resources, including our
assistance budget and Mission Colombo's expertise, to helping Sri
Lankan-led efforts to facilitate closure.
In Maldives, we are worried about the current state of human
rights, rule of law, and lack of due process. All citizens should be
allowed to exercise their human rights and fundamental freedoms.
If confirmed, I would continue to urge the Maldivian Government to
take steps to restore confidence in democracy and the rule of law,
including through social media, a powerful vehicle for information-
sharing in Maldives. I would continue to encourage and support
democracy, judicial independence, and the rule of law in Maldives,
joined by regional and international partners who share our strong
concerns.
Question. If confirmed, what are the potential obstacles to
addressing the specific human rights issues you have identified in your
previous response? What challenges will you face in Sri Lanka and
Maldives in advancing human rights and democracy in general?
Answer. In Sri Lanka, for any justice and accountability process to
be meaningful, it needs to be led and owned by the Sri Lankan people
and needs to be credible and transparent. This is too complex a process
for any country to tackle by itself. Sri Lanka can benefit from the
assistance of the international community, and we stand ready to
support those efforts.
In Maldives, the challenges include politically motivated
prosecutions against critics of the courts and government as well as
attacks on independent institutions and civil liberties. If confirmed,
I will continue to urge the Maldivian Government to take steps to
restore confidence in its hard-fought democracy.
Question. Are you committed to meeting with human rights and other
nongovernmental organizations in the U.S. and with local human rights
NGOs in Sri Lanka and Maldives?
Answer. Yes, absolutely; I welcome such opportunities for dialogue.
In my previous assignments I have cultivated robust consultation with
local and international human rights organizations. If confirmed, I
will further this commitment as I believe maintaining this dialogue is
crucial to informing U.S. Government policies, advancing our values,
and ensuring all voices are heard.
Question. If confirmed, please describe steps that you will take to
enhance effective implementation of Section 620M of the Foreign
Assistance Act of 1961, commonly known as the Leahy amendment, within
the Embassy.
Answer. Human rights vetting consistent with the Leahy amendment is
an integral and essential part of U.S. assistance programs worldwide.
The Leahy amendment helps safeguard against perpetrators of gross
violations of human rights from benefiting from our training and
assistance programs. If confirmed, I will ensure Embassy Colombo will
continue scrupulously to adhere to the requirements of the Leahy
amendment, and the Department will vet all potential security
assistance recipients.
__________
ambassador-designate keshap's responses
to questions from senator risch
Question. Given the new government how do you see Sri Lanka's
rebalance toward China, the United States, and India? What policies
should we be considering to assist their reforms? Do you believe their
shift is sustainable?
Answer. Our overarching goal is to see Sri Lanka become more
prosperous, stable, and secure to the benefit of all of its citizens
and to the broader region. The United States promotes regional
integration and supports Sri Lanka's cooperation with its neighbors
across the Indo-Pacific region, particularly with democracies such as
India, with which Sri Lanka shares bonds of history, culture, and
traditions of democracy and rule of law. To the extent that India,
China, and others in the region lend their energy and support to the
efforts of Sri Lanka to strengthen their democracy and enhance their
productivity, we welcome those efforts. To the extent that countries in
the region contribute to and uphold a rules-based order, commit
themselves to peaceful resolution of disputes, and defend freedom of
navigation and commerce, we welcome those efforts. To the extent that
countries in the region engage in trade and investment that meets the
highest ethical and environmental standards, as exhibited by American
companies, it can have a positive impact on living standards and
prosperity.
We welcome the new Sri Lankan Government's professed desire to
partner more closely with the United States, the United Nations, and
the international community. It is for the people of Sri Lanka to
determine their politics, but the international community can and
should help the Sri Lankan people strengthen democracy, civil society,
and human rights, including freedom of expression, including by the
media, and freedom of religion.
If confirmed, I would work with the government, civil society, and
other partners to play a constructive role in helping Sri Lanka achieve
its potential and deliver on the ambitions of its people, including
meaningful, concrete steps to address outstanding concerns related to
democratic governance, respect for human rights, reconciliation,
justice, and accountability.
I do believe the shift is sustainable. The Sri Lanka voters turned
out in record numbers to send a clear signal that they want to return
their country to its roots of democracy, inclusiveness, and rule of
law. I believe the people of Sri Lanka will continue to insist that the
government move in that direction, and, if confirmed, I would seek to
add my energy to U.S. efforts to help them realize their positive
vision.
__________
ambassador-designate keshap's responses
to questions from senator rubio
Question. President Maithripala Sirisena is positioned to lead his
country in a new direction that respects religious diversity and
freedom. He said in a February 2015 speech, ``While protecting the
country's main religion Buddhism, we also protect the rights and
freedom of Hindu, Muslim, and Catholic people in practicing their
religion and create consensus among them to build up this country.''
Since coming into office, he has created three new ministries to handle
religious affairs for the Muslim, Christian, and Hindu communities
respectively. In addition, the special police unit created by the
former government has been disbanded.
How can the U.S. Government strongly encourage the positive
movement that has occurred in recent months? What programs can
be undertaken to deepen respect for religious diversity and
religious freedom?
Answer. The United States promotes respect for religious diversity
and freedom of religion or belief and strongly supports the Sri Lankan
Government's recent steps to foster reconciliation between Sri Lanka's
religious communities. In a welcome departure from the politics of the
recent past, President Sirisena and his administration have exhibited
in word and deed a genuine desire to achieve the pluralistic society
voters demanded in January.
It is for the people of Sri Lanka to determine their politics, but
the international community and the U.S. can, and should, help the Sri
Lankan people strengthen civil society and human rights, including
freedom of religion or belief. If confirmed, I would work with the U.S.
Congress, the Sri Lankan Government, civil society, religious leaders
and others to promote respect for freedom of religion or belief and
religious diversity, and would work to further U.S. Embassy programs
aimed at bringing religious communities together.
__________
ambassador-designate keshap's responses
to questions from senator coons
Question. Reconciliation Efforts.--The government of President
Sirisena, elected in January 2015, has made reconciliation one of its
primary goals. What concrete steps has the government taken toward
reconciliation and what more do you think needs to be done? For
instance, the Tamil National Alliance said right after the election
that the release of political prisoners, return of land, and
demilitarization were immediately actionable to show steps toward
reconciliation. Have these been accomplished? Will Tamils, Muslims, and
other minority groups be given equal opportunities under this new
government?
Answer. The Sirisena government has made a public commitment to
take credible steps to promote justice, accountability, and
reconciliation in relation to human rights violations and abuses. Such
processes are always challenging, but the United States will continue
to support credible efforts to address these important and difficult
issues in a way that facilitates reconciliation as well as a durable
and lasting peace for the Sri Lankan people. We have welcomed important
steps taken by the Sirisena administration, including releasing
political prisoners on bail and returning some land in the North and
East, as well as gestures of conciliation, such as allowing the singing
of the National Anthem in Tamil.
The Sri Lanka voters turned out in record numbers to send a clear
signal that they want to return their country to its roots of
democracy, inclusiveness, and rule of law. While it is for the people
of Sri Lanka to determine their politics, the administration wants to
help the Sri Lankan people strengthen democracy, civil society, and
respect for human rights and to pursue an inclusive government that
allows for meaningful participation by all Sri Lankans of all ethnic
and religious groups. If confirmed, that will be my goal as well.
Question. UNHRC Role.--Since the United States joined the U.N.
Human Rights Council in 2012, we have led three resolutions on Sri
Lanka regarding accountability for crimes committed during and after
the war, and on ongoing human rights abuses. Should Sri Lanka stay on
the agenda of the UNHRC? Does the United States plan to lead a fourth
resolution on Sri Lanka before the end of our term in December 2015?
What are the dangers inherent in allowing Sri Lanka to slip from
international attention, such that accountability is pursued unchecked
by international actors through domestic efforts on the island?
Answer. We welcome the new government's professed desire to partner
more closely with the United States, the United Nations, and the
international community. We are heartened by the new government's
engagement with the U.N. Office of the High Commissioner in Geneva.
Over the past 5 years, the United States has been steadfast in
pursuit of justice, accountability, and reconciliation. The new
government in Sri Lanka presents an opportunity for a more
collaborative approach. Our focus is on urging a credible process. It
is too early at this juncture to determine what our position will be
later this year. If confirmed, I will work to encourage Sri Lankan
engagement with the U.N. on these vitally important issues, consistent
with the attention and focus we have dedicated in recent years.
__________
NOMINATIONS
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 9, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Hon. Michele Thoren Bond, of the District of Columbia, to be an
Assistant Secretary of State (Consular Affairs)
Dr. Sarah Mendelson, of the District of Columbia, to be U.S.
Representative on the Economic and Social Council of
the United Nations
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:03 a.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker
(chairman of the committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Corker, Isakson, and Cardin.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CORKER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE
The Chairman. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee will
come to order.
We thank you for being here.
Today the committee will consider two nominees, the Hon.
Michele Bond to be Assistant Secretary of State of Consular
Affairs, and Dr. Sarah Mendelson to be the Representative of
the United States on the Economic and Social Council of the
United Nations with the rank of Ambassador, as well as to be
the Alternate Representative of the United States to the
General Assembly of the United Nations.
The Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs is
responsible for issuing passports to Americans looking to
travel abroad, issuing visas to people around the world trying
to emigrate or to visit the United States, and assisting
American citizens abroad in emergency and nonemergency
situations. These duties also include the facilitation of
international adoptions, and we certainly are very interested
in that, and thank you for your work relative to that in the
past.
Ambassador Bond is an accomplished consular officer and
currently the Acting Assistant Secretary. I look forward to
hearing her views on how to improve the passport and visa
issuance processes and better serve Americans abroad. I
appreciate Ambassador Bond's efforts regarding the suspension
of exit permits and the DRC, especially with her visit this
spring to press the Congolese to issue permits to U.S. citizens
who have adopted children there. One of our staffers, Sarah
Downs, has spent inordinate amounts of time traveling there
herself, and again we thank you for your efforts on behalf of
so many people. I look forward to hearing about the Bureau's
strategy to work to resolve this issue as the DRC Government
reviews and approves adoption cases and embarks on implementing
adoption reform legislation.
The U.S. Representative to the Economic and Social Council
of the United Nations--that is a mouthful--ECOSOC, represents
the United States on intergovernmental bodies which oversee the
U.N.'s work on economic, social, and human rights issues, and
the U.N.'s field operations in the areas of development, post-
conflict peace-building, and humanitarian assistance.
The Council's functions and powers include initiating
studies and reports on human welfare and the quality of life
which drives action at the U.N. General Assembly. Modern
slavery is inflicted on as many as 27 million men, women, and
children around the globe. Senator Cardin and myself and others
have passed unanimously out of this committee a bill that we
think can have transformative effects on this issue if we can
all make it happen in the appropriate way, so we obviously are
very interested in your nomination. It is obviously a very
important issue. I look forward to hearing and learning more
how you will address this in your new role, if confirmed.
Lastly, with the U.N. General Assembly voting on the
Sustainable Development Goals in September, the United States
will require strong representation. I hope you can provide some
insights on how this process will affect U.S. interests.
I thank you for being here. I know you are going to
introduce your families in just a moment. We welcome them.
And with that, I will turn it over to our ranking member.
STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND
Senator Cardin. Well, let me thank Senator Corker for
arranging this hearing on two very important nominations. I
thank you very much for accommodating this hearing. I know it
is a very busy time for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee,
but one of our principal responsibilities is to timely consider
President Obama's nominees, so thank you very much for
scheduling these hearings.
And, Mr. Chairman, I want to welcome two nominees that I
have adopted and represent in the United States Senate, along
with Senator Mikulski. You see, they are from the District of
Columbia, and we have not seen fit to give them full
representation here in the United States Congress. So Senator
Mikulski and I, recognizing that the District is former
Maryland land, we have adopted the residents.
The Chairman. Actually, I think that is a resolution to the
issue, to become a part of Maryland and be done with it.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cardin. One of the problems that we talk about is
adoptions, so maybe this is an issue that we will be able to
take up.
Welcome to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I thank
both of you for your public service and your willingness to
serve our country in two very important positions during a very
trying time. And I thank your families, because this truly is a
family sacrifice. I know at least in one case it has been a
family effort; both serve in the Foreign Service. So thank you
both, and thank your families for what you are doing.
The mission of the Bureau of Consular Affairs is to protect
the lives and interests of American citizens abroad, and we
thank you for that. There are a lot of challenges there.
Foreign Service officers perform incredible service to our
country. They deal with Americans who have trouble abroad, and
that become a major problem for Foreign Service officers. They
deal with foreign-sourced adoptions, which is an area that
Senator Corker raised that we are very concerned about where
some heart-rendering challenges have been imposed to prevent
the completion of adoptions. And the visa processing system.
Mr. Chairman, I was just, last week, in Havana meeting with
our Foreign Service officers as they were handling
applications. I must tell you, that is an incredible chore.
They are undermanned from the point of view of the resources
that they have, and there is a lot of pressure that they get
everything right, and I thank them very much for their service.
In regards to hostage situations, I just want to mention
that, because President Obama came out last week with a
comprehensive rewrite of how we are going to handle
circumstances such as the Weinstein situation we had in
Maryland where a USAID worker was kidnapped and ultimately he
lost his life. The administration is reorganizing that. I have
introduced legislation, along with Senator Cornyn, so that we
have a single-point person in order to deal with it, and I am
hopeful that we can adopt the administration's proposal but
improve it with a single point of contact person that we can
hold accountable for coordinating all activities, but it also
gives the family an opportunity to have a single-point contact,
which was very much missing in the Weinstein case. So we might
want to talk about that also during the nomination confirmation
process.
It is also a pleasure to welcome Ms. Mendelson to today's
hearing. The U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Economic and Social
Council plays an important role in the multilateral diplomacy
to advance the U.S. interests in strengthening human rights,
sustainable development, and effective humanitarian assistance.
I particularly want to focus on the Millennium Development
Goals because that is very timely right now. I have had a
chance to meet with Helen Clark of the United Nations. I also
represent the United States Senate, along with Senator Johnson,
at the U.N. as part of our mission, and I must tell you, I was
encouraged and disappointed.
The Millennium Development Goals have been incredibly
successful, saved millions of lives. It has produced a
worldwide effort to use all resources, including
nongovernmental resources, to achieve demonstrable progress on
saving young people, babies, helping women, et cetera.
So the next Millennium Development Goals I hoped would get
the same serious attention. Instead, I saw a list, I think it
was 17 proposed goals, which is too many. I agree, there are
too many. But number 16 is the one I think should probably be
number 1, and I am concerned it is getting lost in the shuffle,
and that is the concern about corruption and good governance
which is so corrosive globally and so responsible for so many
of the problems that we face.
So I would hope that I will get a commitment here to make
sure that we fight hard to make that part of the Millennium
Development Goals and that we elevate its importance in our
efforts to try to deal with that issue.
There are many other issues I could talk about. I will
mention one other that concerns me, the United Nations Family
Planning Association. I say that because the Senate Republican
appropriators this week inhibited funding to the United Nations
Family Planning Association. I mention that because that is a
source of funding right now for what we do in Syria and Jordan
that provides normal childbirth delivery services to refugee
camps that I am concerned could be cut off that could affect
the safety and lives of many maternal cases. I would hope that
we would find a strategy to make sure that that type of vital
link to child safety is maintained, and I would welcome Dr.
Mendelson's comments on this issue and many others.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to our discussion.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Cardin. I appreciate the
way that we were able to work together and make things happen,
and certainly coordinating this meeting is much appreciated, so
thank you.
I will now turn to our nominees, the Hon. Michele Bond and
Dr. Sarah Mendelson.
Our first nominee is Michele Bond, a career member of the
Senior Foreign Service, class of Minister Counselor with nearly
40 years of experience. She currently serves as Acting
Assistant Secretary for Consular Affairs. Ambassador Bond has
served in a range of posts at home and abroad, including
Ambassador to Lesotho from 2010 to 2012.
Our second nominee is Sarah Mendelson, who currently serves
as Senior Advisor and Director of Human Rights Initiative at
the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Prior to
joining the CSIS, Dr. Mendelson was Deputy Assistant
Administrator for the Bureau of Democracy, Conflict, and
Humanitarian Assistance at USAID.
We want to thank you very much for being here and sharing
your thoughts. Your full statements will be entered into the
record without objection, and if you would just give us about a
5-minute introduction, we will ask a few questions. I know you
want to introduce your families, but thank you for being here,
and we will start with Ambassador Bond.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. MICHELE THOREN BOND, NOMINATED TO BE
ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR CONSULAR AFFAIRS
Ms. Bond. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin,
and distinguished members of the Foreign Relations Committee.
It is the honor of a lifetime to be here with you this morning.
I am grateful to the President and Secretary Kerry for the
confidence and trust they placed in me by selecting me for this
position.
I am proud to introduce three of our four children, Robert,
Elizabeth, and Lillian Bond. My family is the center of my
life. I could not have been successful without their love and
support. My family is also one of dedicated public servants,
and that is why my husband and our younger son cannot be with
us today. My husband, Ambassador Clifford Bond, is a retired
Foreign Service officer currently working at the U.S. Embassy
in Kiev, Ukraine, coordinating U.S. aid to Ukraine. Our son,
Matthew, is a Peace Corps Volunteer, teaching English in
Indonesia.
My mother was the earliest and most influential inspiration
for my life and for my career. She worked for the Department of
State in post-war Stockholm when she was only 21, and years
later at NATO and in Washington. She introduced me to public
service. Through her, I met smart, dedicated Foreign Service
officers and began to understand how diplomacy affects the
lives of individuals and benefits our country.
I began working at State as a college student during summer
breaks and served on my first crisis task force in 1974, the
invasion of Cyprus. Our resources were rudimentary compared to
what we have now, but the issues would be familiar to any of my
colleagues today. Desperate families called seeking information
about loved ones in Cyprus and Greece. We scribbled details and
contact information on 3-by-5 cards. It is an extraordinary
honor to lead a Bureau that has the same dedication and focus
today that I first experienced more than 40 years ago.
Fortunately, we now have far more sophisticated tools,
thanks in part to Congress' recognition of the vital importance
of our work. The services we provide matter deeply and
personally to our customers, your constituents. At its heart,
Consular Affairs is about service. We provide assistance in
small emergencies like lost passports, and large ones such as
natural disasters. We are keenly aware that what we do is never
routine for the people we serve. Given tens of thousands of
daily opportunities to assist our customers, we are committed
to meeting the highest standards of transparency, efficiency,
and professionalism, creating lasting positive impressions of
the United States and its government.
This week I was named the recipient of the 2015 Thomas
Jefferson Award by American Citizens Abroad. I am honored and
humbled by this award which recognizes commitment to the
Department of State's highest priority, the protection of
American citizens overseas. I am proud, too, of the values it
represents, openness, listening and responding to the needs of
our citizens, and meeting those needs with friendly,
professional efficiency, values I pledge to uphold should I be
confirmed.
Adoption, as you mentioned, Senator, is one of the most
personal and sensitive issues in which we become involved, and
it is one that matters to me deeply and has been a focus of my
work for many years. My grandmother and her sister were
adopted. I have worked on adoptions from behind the interview
window overseas and at the policy table in Washington. I carry
with me the stories of the families and children I have met.
They inspire in me an abiding passion to bring greater
transparency and accountability to intercountry adoptions. I am
proud to have contributed to the United States leading role on
the Hague Adoption Convention and, if confirmed, I will
intensify our efforts to make intercountry adoption a real
option for vulnerable children everywhere who need a family.
Through careful adjudication of U.S. passport and visa
applications, consular officers strengthen border security
while facilitating legitimate travel that promotes economic
growth, generates jobs across the country, and fosters good
will and understanding about the United States across the
world. If confirmed, I will ensure we continue to provide
secure, efficient passport and visa services to protect our
Nation, grow our economy, and unite families.
In Consular Affairs, we are one team with one mission. But,
of course, we do not work alone. I am committed to a whole-of-
government approach to serving our citizens. I take tremendous
pride in leading a dedicated, talented team of over 13,000
professionals working in nearly 300 offices around the world.
We come from all walks of life and all corners of our Nation.
We proudly include hundreds of veterans, and my team works hard
to ensure that we are a diverse one. We work closely with
Congress on every issue in our portfolio. We engage with your
staff daily on issues that impact your constituents and their
communities. If confirmed, I will sustain and build on Consular
Affairs' reputation as a model for cooperative, productive
relations with Congress.
Thank you for your attention. I look forward to your
questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bond follows:]
Prepared Statement of Michele Thoren Bond
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members of
the Foreign Relations Committee, it is the honor of a lifetime to be
here today. I am grateful to the President and Secretary Kerry for the
confidence and trust they placed in me by selecting me for this
position.
I am proud to introduce three of our four children, Robert,
Elisabeth, and Lillian Bond. My family is the center of my life. I
could not have been successful without their love and support. My
family is also one of dedicated public servants, and that is why my
husband and younger son cannot join us today.
My husband, Ambassador Clifford Bond, is a retired Foreign Service
officer currently working at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, coordinating
U.S. aid to Ukraine. Our son Matthew is a Peace Corps Volunteer,
teaching English in Indonesia.
My mother was the earliest and most influential inspiration for my
life, and my career. She worked for the Department of State, in post-
war Stockholm, when she was only 21, and years later at NATO, and in
Washington. She introduced me to public service. Through her, I met
smart, dedicated Foreign Service officers, and began to understand how
diplomacy affects the lives of individuals and benefits our country.
I began working at the Department of State as a college student,
during summer breaks. I served on my first crisis task force in 1974--
the Cyprus invasion. Our resources were rudimentary compared to what we
have now, but the issues would be familiar to any of my colleagues
today--desperate families called seeking information about loved ones
in Cyprus and Greece. We scribbled details and contact information for
each family on 3x5 cards. It is an extraordinary honor to lead a Bureau
that has the same dedication and focus today that I first experienced
more than 40 years ago. Since then, I have had the privilege of serving
in places as varied as the Netherlands, Guatemala, Russia, and Lesotho.
The positions I held over the course of my tenure prepared me well to
lead the Bureau of Consular Affairs.
Bureau of Consular Affairs
My Bureau, CA, directly touches lives across the globe. We serve on
the front lines of U.S. diplomacy, and our work is central to the
advancement of U.S. foreign policy. We guard against foreign and
domestic threats by assisting U.S. citizens overseas and safeguarding
our borders at home. We are committed to protecting the integrity of
our processes and decisions. We are there for our citizens during the
best and worst days of their lives abroad--assisting with overseas
adoptions, aiding those who have lost a loved one, or organizing an
evacuation to get our citizens to safety. We open up the world to our
citizens with one of the world's most coveted travel documents--the
U.S. passport. The impact of our work is felt across the Nation. Our
work affects the lives of everyone in this room and every one of your
constituents.
Our most valuable asset, by far, is our staff. The members of the
consular team are incredible public servants. I have seen how the
Bureau has met the challenges of 21st century diplomacy, adapted
technology to improve the speed, scope, and quality of our service,
learned from experience and embraced innovation. Investment in CA's
human capital is vital to engage, develop, and retain these talented
professionals. If confirmed, I will build on the hard-won achievements
of my predecessors by sustaining a well-trained, motivated, dynamic,
and efficient workforce.
I pledge that the Bureau of Consular Affairs will continue to
protect our citizens abroad and provide all available assistance for
any U.S. citizen in need overseas. We will continue to vigilantly
protect our Nation from those who wish to harm our citizens. We will
further our efforts to make international adoption a real option for
children who need permanent families, knowing they will be welcomed
into American hearts and homes. Today I will discuss a few of the many
achievements of our great team and how we develop leaders and
innovators in foreign policy by furthering the vibrant culture of the
Bureau of Consular Affairs.
Overseas citizens services--CA's number 1 priority
The safety and protection of U.S. citizens overseas is among the
U.S. Government's highest priorities, and CA's number one priority. CA
has assisted U.S. citizens affected by a number of recent crises,
including earthquakes in Nepal, political strife in Burundi, and the
influx of those fleeing Yemen to Djibouti and other countries. In FY
2014, CA evacuated U.S. citizens from areas affected by hurricanes,
typhoons, and Ebola; continued our engagement on detainee and hostage
cases; visited 8,600 prisoners; performed 30,000 welfare and
whereabouts checks; documented 66,000 U.S. citizen children born
abroad; and consoled 10,200 bereaved families. We assisted thousands of
U.S. citizens affected by abuse, mental illness, and crime abroad.
We promote intercountry adoption as a viable option throughout the
world. We work to prevent international parental child abduction and to
seek the return of abducted children.
Over a third of U.S. citizens hold a U.S. passport. Increasingly,
they travel to destinations off the beaten path and engage in more
adventurous activities. Our job to protect their safety and welfare
remains the same, but is now more challenging. We proactively reach out
to citizens to deliver the information they need to travel safely and
responsibly. Our Consular Information Program, including Travel Alerts,
Travel Warnings, and the Worldwide Caution, is the Department's primary
tool for providing U.S. citizens with timely, accurate information
about potential threats to their safety abroad.
We continuously harness new technologies to keep information
flowing during rapidly changing circumstances or crises overseas. We
are on duty 24/7 to respond immediately as crises arise. Our Office of
Policy Coordination and Public Affairs works with colleagues overseas
to send messages out through social media outlets including Facebook
and Twitter. Constant engagement with the public through these venues
allows us to get the message out quickly in times of crisis. Our goal
is to provide our citizens with the information and resources they need
to make their own appropriate decisions in real time.
CA understands the gravity of our responsibility to U.S. citizens
traveling overseas, and we consult closely with interagency partners
and Congress on policies and issues affecting our citizens' safety
abroad. We have steadily increased our ability to inform and assist
families during intercountry adoptions, for example.
U.S. Citizen Hostages Policy: CA played a key role in the
interagency group tasked with a Presidentially directed, government-
wide review of the management of overseas hostage cases. Based on the
hostage policy review, the President has established a Washington-
based, FBI-led interagency Hostage Recovery Fusion Cell (HRFC), a
National Security Council-convened Hostage Response Group (HRG)
providing policy guidance to the HRFC, and a Special Envoy for Hostage
Affairs at the State Department who will lead diplomatic engagement on
U.S. hostage policy and coordinate all diplomatic engagements in
support of hostage recovery efforts. CA has assigned a consular officer
fulltime to the HRFC as well as staff to support the Special Envoy's
Office and to support hostage victims' families.
U.S. Detainees Abroad: In the Bureau of Consular Affairs, we
continually monitor the cases of citizens detained abroad and work to
obtain the release of those wrongfully held overseas. U.S. citizen
detainee cases can be highly visible, resource-intensive, and difficult
to resolve, especially in countries without U.S. embassies.
Three U.S.-Iranian citizens--Saeed Abedini, Amir Hekmati, and Jason
Rezaian--are currently imprisoned in Iran. Abedini and Hekmati have
been charged, tried, and sentenced; Rezaian has been charged but not
tried. President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and Under Secretary Sherman
have raised these cases with their Iranian counterparts. Department
officials also regularly raise the case of Robert Levinson, a former
FBI agent who has been missing in Iran since March 2007.
International Parental Child Abduction (IPCA): CA is the U.S.
Central Authority for the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of
International Parental Child Abduction. We work closely with 73 Hague
partner countries, and with authorities in non-Hague countries, to
prevent situations where one parent wrongfully removes or retains a
child away from his or her habitual residence, and to help left-behind
parents seek return of, or access to, children who have been wrongfully
removed or retained. CA recently released its first annual report under
the Sean and David Goldman International Parental Child Abduction
Prevention and Return Act of 2014. In 2014, 781 abduction and access
cases were resolved. CA continues to encourage non-Convention partner
countries to become party to the Convention. After years of diplomatic
effort, CA and colleagues across the Department celebrated Japan's
accession in April 2014.
Universal Accreditation Act (UAA): We are delighted Congress passed
the UAA. CA has engaged adoption service providers, advocacy groups,
and national adoption organizations to inform them of the changes UAA
introduced, to train on practical aspects of implementation, and to
address issues and concerns as they arose before and after the UAA
entered into force last July. Before the UAA, the standards of ethical
conduct embodied in the Hague Adoption Convention applied in fewer than
half of all intercountry adoption cases. Now, all U.S. citizens
adopting abroad benefit from uniform standards governing the conduct of
all U.S. adoption service providers. UAA also provides for universal
monitoring and oversight of service provider adherence to those
standards. The UAA closed a critical gap in protection for U.S.
adoptive families.
Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) Adoptions: The Department is
seeking to unite nearly 600 Congolese children adopted, or in the
process of being adopted, by U.S. citizens with their new families. The
Congolese Government abruptly suspended issuance of exit permits almost
2 years ago. Without exit permits, these children cannot join their
families in the United States. We are addressing this issue on multiple
levels. In addition to constant engagement by Embassy Kinshasa and
Ambassador Swan, the Department's Special Advisor for Children's
Issues, Ambassador Susan Jacobs, led a delegation to the DRC in
December and pressed the Congolese Government on these issues. I
visited Kinshasa in March, where I met government and parliamentary
representatives, and some of the American parents who are living in
Kinshasa with their children. I continue to follow this issue closely.
Secretary Kerry urged President Kabila to lift the suspension in
May, August, and October 2014. Last August, President Kabila and
Secretary Kerry agreed to establish a joint commission to discuss
options to allow children with finalized adoptions to depart and to
consult on adoption reforms. Some progress has been made; 10 children
with life-threatening medical conditions have received exit permits and
several other cases are waiting to be reviewed by DRC officials. We are
working with the other countries affected by this suspension, including
Canada, Italy, Belgium, France, and the Netherlands, to press the DRC
to resolve this protracted situation. We have met numerous times with
congressional staff to keep them informed about this situation. If
confirmed, I commit to you that I will continue to push for urgent
resolution of these cases. These children belong with the loving
families who have adopted them. We will continue to keep lines of
communication open.
Passports--safeguarding the most coveted travel document
The Bureau of Consular Affairs opens the world to millions of U.S.
citizens. Our passport agencies unlock the gate to global experiences
and mutual understanding for U.S. citizen travelers. By accurately and
efficiently adjudicating U.S. passport applications, U.S. passport
agencies and fraud prevention teams reliably provide U.S. citizens with
the world's most coveted travel document, and keep that document out of
the hands of criminals. We know Congress shares our goal of continually
improving the integrity of the passport issuance process, and in this
regard, we trust Congress and staffers will do everything possible to
ensure that we have access to all needed databases, including the full
Social Security Administration death file, access to State driver's
license information, and both Federal and State level incarceration
information.
CA operates 27 domestic passport agencies, two document print
centers, and two passport information and call centers across the
United States. We have established 12 new passport agencies since 2008
to handle rapidly increasing demand. We adjudicated 14.1 million
passport applications in FY 2014, delivering more than 99 percent of
those products within their targeted timeframes. There are currently
nearly 1 million applications in the system--the highest volume since
2009. In the last 2 fiscal years, passports generated nearly $3 billion
in revenue. There are approximately 123 million valid passports in
circulation.
Foreign Terrorist Fighters: CA initiated policies and streamlined
procedures to deny or revoke passports of U.S. citizens engaged in
activities as Foreign Terrorist Fighters (FTFs) who pose significant
threats to U.S. national security and foreign policy. CA works
diligently with our federal partners to ensure that appropriate
passport denial or revocation helps to keep the United States safe. We
work closely with the FBI's Counterterrorism Division and other
government departments and agencies to ensure broad familiarity with
the availability and use of passport denial and revocation to prevent
travel. We engaged with the Terrorism Screening Center and partnered
with Diplomatic Security (DS) to provide assistance to the National
Joint Terrorism Task Force.
To address the potential threat posed by other FTFs using the
identities or passports of ``unreported deceased'' individuals, we
implemented procedures to cancel the U.S. passports of deceased FTFs
and of hostages killed by terrorists. Cancelled passport information is
available to all overseas posts and passport agencies, and is provided
in real time to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and Interpol.
We continue to work with the intelligence community and the National
Counter Terrorism Center on potential passport revocation of suspected
U.S. citizens serving as FTFs, and will facilitate revocation
appropriately where sufficient evidence exists and the action is
appropriate.
Our domestic passport agencies and overseas posts remain on alert
for terrorism-related information in conducting adjudications and work
with DS to share relevant information with our federal partners.
Passport Surge: The projected demand for passport applications for
FY 2015 was recently revised to 14.5 million. We expect an
unprecedented passport renewal surge in the coming years. To prepare
for this, we are modernizing our information systems, including
planning for online passport renewals, automated refunds, and
additional payment options, to improve customers' overall experience
and manage our workload more efficiently.
Next Generation Passport: CA will begin systemwide deployment of
the Next Generation Passport in FY 2016. This upgraded document
features security enhancements designed to prevent counterfeiting and
fraudulent use of lost or stolen passports. The most prominent
enhancement is a laser-engraved polycarbonate data page.
Visas--uniting families, growing the economy, securing our Nation
Secretary Kerry believes that foreign policy is economic policy and
this is particularly true when it comes to visa policy. The Bureau of
Consular Affairs directly affects businesses across the country by
facilitating international tourism and helping local entrepreneurs
recruit the world's innovators to help them develop the next generation
of technology. Demand for visas to visit the United States has
skyrocketed worldwide.
Others have recognized our achievements as well: the United States
Travel Association awarded the Bureau's Deputy Assistant Secretary for
Visa Services the ``Distinguished Partner Award'' in March 2015,
writing that he ``helped create an environment that welcomes
international visitors to the United States, who bring with them
spending dollars and good will that have helped advance the U.S.
economy and American public diplomacy.'' In 2014, a record 75 million
international visitors traveled to the United States, a 7-percent
increase over 2013; they spent over $220 billion. Tourism is America's
largest services export and one that can't be outsourced.
Our investments to increase visa processing capacity and decrease
visa interview wait times worldwide create jobs across the United
States. International travelers support 1.1 million U.S. jobs. In a
January 2012 Executive order, President Obama directed State to
increase visa-processing capacity in China and Brazil by 40 percent in
2012 and to ensure 80 percent of applicants worldwide wait less than 3
weeks for their visa interviews. We exceeded both goals. CA reached the
global target for wait times in August 2012, and wait times in key
markets such as Brazil, China, India, and Mexico have rarely exceeded
single digits since 2012. More than 95 percent of visa applicants
requiring an interview receive an appointment in less than 3 weeks.
The United States will continue to attract tourists, businesses,
students, and talent from around the world--in fact, President Obama's
goal is to welcome 100 million international visitors annually by 2021.
The vast majority of visitors travel to the United States with no
malicious intent. However, some visa applicants are criminals or
terrorists. Every visa decision we make, thousands of times a day, is a
national security decision. Each of our consular officers understands
this. CA is diligently working with DHS to expand visa reciprocity, the
Visa Waiver Program, and the Interview Waiver Program, as appropriate,
because these efforts allow us to focus our resources where the risks
are highest.
Afghan and Iraqi Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) Programs: We could
not do our jobs overseas without the dedication and expertise of our
locally engaged staff. Working for the U.S. Government sometimes comes
at a personal cost to our staff and their families. In Iraq and
Afghanistan, this work has placed some local colleagues in grave
danger. CA works with the interagency to adjudicate and efficiently
issue Special Immigrant Visas to colleagues in Iraq and Afghanistan who
worked alongside our soldiers and diplomats.
As of December 14, 2014, we had issued all 4,000 Afghan principal
applicant SIVs authorized for use by the Consolidated Appropriations
Act for FY 2014 (3,000 SIV numbers, available through September 30,
2015) and the Emergency Afghan Allies Extension Act of 2014 (1,000 SIV
numbers, available through December 31, 2014). The FY 2015 National
Defense Authorization Act authorized 4,000 additional Afghan SIVs for
use by March 31, 2017. To date, we have issued more than 800 of these
SIVs. As of June 26, more than 13,000 Afghans are at some point in the
SIV application review process. The Iraqi program has enough visa
numbers available to respond to demand. Although we issued record
numbers of SIVs in FY 2014, there remain some long-pending cases
undergoing security vetting. We are working with the interagency to
speed processing and resolve cases while steadfastly maintaining the
security of our immigration system and of the United States.
Visa Waiver Program and Interview Waiver Pilot Program: The Visa
Wavier Program is essential to achieve the administration's policy and
security goals, and maximize efficiency for our customers. We work with
DHS to expand the Visa Waiver Program as appropriate, with Chile
joining in 2014. With DHS concurrence, we indefinitely extended the
Interview Waiver Program, which allows us to waive interviews for
applicants in certain low-risk populations--over 1 million applicants
in 2014--allowing us to focus on higher-risk applicants. We continue to
work with our partners to determine the feasibility of expanding the
Visa Waiver Program, the Interview Waiver Program, and reciprocal visa
validities in support of the President's goal to attract 100 million
visitors to the United States annually by 2021.
Foreign Fighters and the Visa Waiver Program (VWP): The protection
of U.S. borders is of the utmost importance to CA. We collaborate
closely with DHS to support its mission of protecting the United States
by promoting effective aviation and border security screening with our
foreign partners through enhanced information-sharing. To travel
without a visa under the VWP, an applicant must obtain authorization
through the Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) prior to
boarding a U.S.-bound air or sea carrier. Should standard ESTA
screening indicate that a traveler might be ineligible, that
individual's ESTA application is denied, and the traveler is directed
to the nearest U.S. Embassy or consulate to apply for a visa. In
November 2014, ESTA enhancements went into effect that allow the U.S.
Government to more effectively identify travelers who might pose a risk
to the United States, including foreign fighters.
Ten-Year Validity for Chinese Visas: The Bureau of Consular Affairs
was instrumental in negotiating and shepherding the expansion of
Chinese visa validity, which President Obama announced in November
2014. Visa demand in Mission China has risen by more than 53 percent in
the wake of the announcement and the Chinese are issuing visas with the
same reciprocal validity to U.S. citizens. This has a significant
impact on travel and tourism in both countries and helps boost people-
to-people engagement. It will be a tremendous boon to U.S. businesses
and have a significant effect on our economy. From January to May 2015,
CA issued 1.5 million visas to Chinese travelers.
Modernized Immigrant Visa: As a global service organization, CA
must constantly ensure that our processes meet the needs of our
customers. We are working with DHS, private and nonfederal public
actors, and technology experts to implement a streamlined, electronic
immigrant visa process that will save time and money.
Fraud prevention--facilitate travel, maximize security measures
Fraud prevention and detection are a critical part of our
operations. As the demand for our services increases, so do efforts by
criminal elements, or those who think they can catch us off guard. We
must remain vigilant in our work while still maintaining efficiency.
New tools and technologies help identify and malafide applicants. One
of CA's priorities for 2015 is to develop programs and techniques to
prescreen applicants prior to their interviews. Our global fraud
tracking database allows us to more efficiently document and analyze
fraud research. Our fraud prevention and detection efforts are
successful in part because of increased collaboration across the U.S.
Government, and access to better information and technology.
CA systems--keeping up with demand in a changing world
Stable technological systems are a top priority for CA. This is key
to improving customers' overall experience and managing our workload
efficiently.
Systems modernization: The growing demand for our services puts
unrelenting strain on our aging systems. A systems outage in June
disrupted service and caused considerable hardship for some customers
across the globe.
A June 9 hardware failure halted the flow of biometric data for
visa application security checks to posts overseas, preventing posts
from issuing visas and processing new visa applications. The effort to
switch to the standby system failed due to corrupted data. CA
collaborated with private sector experts and the White House's U.S.
Digital Services team and worked around the clock to restore service by
taking a database with 6-month old data and merging the data from the
failed production system into the new one. CA then reconnected posts to
the central biometrics database in a staggered worldwide rollout,
beginning with our largest nonimmigrant visa and immigrant visa
processing posts. All visa-issuing posts were reconnected by June 26.
Taking into account the legal requirements to conduct security
screening for visa applicants, CA explored every available option to
facilitate legitimate travel during the outage. We secured strong
cooperation with DHS/CBP on port of entry (POE) document waiver
requests for cases with humanitarian or high-level U.S. national
interest and for more than 250 critically needed temporary agricultural
workers. We issued more than 3,500 visas for urgent and humanitarian
travel in cases that did not require fingerprints, including visas for
adopted children, diplomats on official travel, and some temporary
workers. After the systems were restored, consular sections overseas
worked extended hours and through the weekend to rapidly return to
normal processing times.
CA is committed to modernizing consular systems to prevent future
recurrences of these problems. We are migrating our databases to a
significantly more robust combined hardware and software Oracle Exadata
platform. We recently installed new servers in Beijing, Guangzhou, and
Shanghai that can handle up to four times the workload. We will install
the same servers in our busiest missions over the course of the year.
ConsularOne: We are in the development phase of ConsularOne, a
major IT initiative to consolidate all consular applications into one
integrated system. This will reduce inefficiencies and data
duplication, improve our ability to track demand, and help us to better
detect trends and anomalies across all consular services. ConsularOne
is a key component of online passport renewal, which we plan to
introduce next year.
CA Budget and Resources--Responsibly Use Public Resources Without
Burdening Taxpayers
If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring we are fiscally
responsible and shrewd stewards of our funds. CA is funded by consular
user fees, not by taxpayers. In FY 2014, CA generated $3.6 billion in
revenue, which supports all consular operations in the Department and
provides border security-related funding to some interagency partners.
CA funds: CA is fully fee funded, and collects and retains fees for
certain visa and passport services pursuant to specific statutory
authority. We do not collect fees for every service we perform. Under
current fee statutes, we are allowed to retain approximately 80 percent
of the fees we collect, with the balance going to the Treasury.
Currently, CA has 12 Partner Bureaus with programs or positions
directly supported through retained consular fees. If confirmed, I
would ask your consideration in enhancing our ability to retain and
spend the funds generated through consular fees. With added
flexibilities, we can improve and expand our work to secure the safety
and security of U.S. citizens abroad.
Cost of service model: CA's cost of service model uses activity-
based costing methodologies to calculate the true cost of consular
services, to recommend appropriate fees for services, and to inform
CA's funding strategies so CA appropriately administers the
Department's Consular and Border Security Programs (CBSP). Fee
flexibilities included in the FY 2016 President's Budget Request will
ensure future efficient and responsible disbursement of CBSP funds that
is in line with how fees are set. We will also create, implement, and
institutionalize an authoritative CBSP plan and overarching governance
process to guide budget planning, execution, and monitoring.
Consular leadership--developing the workforce of the 21st century
CA is a global operation with a significant footprint. We have a
workforce of over 13,000 highly trained professionals including Civil
Service employees, Foreign Service officers, and Locally Employed
staff, in more than 300 domestic and overseas offices.
Our colossal and growing workload can only be managed by a first
rate workforce that leverages cutting-edge technological and management
tools. I have every confidence in my team and in CA's senior leaders. I
am committed to fostering the culture of leadership, management, and
innovation excellence that is a hallmark of the Bureau.
We run our operations as effectively and efficiently as possible. I
would like to say that the Bureau of Consular Affairs is a well-oiled
machine, but we are not machines. We are a compassionate, disciplined,
and highly trained corps of individuals dedicated to the dual mission
of protecting U.S. citizens overseas and protecting our Nation's
borders.
To build a team of consummate, compassionate professionals and
prepare the next generation of FSOs, we developed 1CA: one Consular
Affairs team. 1CA is the Bureau's office of leadership, management, and
innovation, a proactive effort to promote excellence in an environment
of budgetary restraint and increasing demand for our services. 1CA
created a management framework based on private industry leading
practices but customized for consular professionals. 1CA has introduced
a practical set of tools and resources that promote collaboration and
help consular teams identify, prioritize, and resolve management and
leadership challenges. Through these tools, our consular sections
across the globe have increased adjudication numbers and reduced
processing times and customer wait times.
It is my hope that CA will continue to foster a culture of
leadership, sound management, and performance principles which exerts a
broader influence across the Department. CA is proud to be the training
ground for the next generation of Foreign Service officers. All entry-
level officers serve in Consular Affairs on their first or second
tours. The capabilities and skills of our diplomats are greatly
enhanced by the tools they learn during their consular tours.
1CA has become a model for how the Department approaches the
development of human capital. Recently, State rolled out the
Department's Leadership and Management Principles, tracking closely to
CA's tenets. Our success has inspired the creation of Teamwork@State,
the Department-wide initiative that provides toolkits and resources on
teamwork across bureaus, posts, and offices.
If confirmed, I will do my utmost to continue to equip my team with
the tools and resources necessary to fulfill their duties. I will also
continue to work with the Department to prepare our new diplomats for
future global challenges.
Relationship with Congress
The work of Consular Affairs often touches our citizens on a deeply
personal level. I am committed to ensuring your constituents receive
the assistance they require from CA in a timely manner and that
information is presented clearly and transparently. If confirmed, I am
committed to strengthening the relationship between Congress and the
Bureau of Consular Affairs. In FY 2014, CA conducted more than 150
legislative briefings, testified at three hearings, and cohosted the
annual Immigration and Consular Conference for all congressional staff.
We conducted domestic agency and border post tours for constituent
services staffers. We want Congress to be well informed of our issues
and wish to be available to you for any inquiries you may have. Two
consular liaison officers have offices on the Hill to respond to
congressional inquiries, connect you with our subject matter experts,
and engage on consular matters via webinars, conferences, and
briefings. We have a dedicated Web site for congressional staff--
travel.state.gov/congress--and dedicated congressional contacts at
every overseas post, domestic passport agency, the National Visa
Center, and the Kentucky Consular Center. During overseas crises, we
establish a dedicated congressional email address for inquiries
concerning constituents in the affected area.
Whole of government approach
If confirmed, I hope to amplify the cooperation among agencies, and
with Congress, to use our resources as efficiently as possible,
bringing a whole-of-government approach to serving the needs of our
citizens. I will continue the close collaboration we enjoy with other
bureaus across the Department and other government agencies to fulfill
our mission of protecting U.S. citizens abroad and facilitating
legitimate travel to the United States.
Conclusion
Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will work with the Secretary to
ensure consular support for America's foreign policy objectives. If
confirmed, I will continue to keep you informed of our resource needs,
and work with you to ensure that the Bureau of Consular Affairs
continues to meet its obligations to our citizens and to our Nation.
The Chairman. Dr. Mendelson.
STATEMENT OF DR. SARAH MENDELSON, NOMINATED TO
BE U.S. REPRESENTATIVE ON THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL OF
THE U.N.
Dr. Mendelson. Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and
distinguished members, thank you for the opportunity to appear
before you as President Obama's nominee to be the United States
Representative to the Economic and Social Council of the United
Nations. I am grateful to President Obama, Secretary Kerry, and
Ambassador Power for this opportunity and for their confidence
in me.
I would like to acknowledge my husband, John Harvey, who is
here with me today and whose own career has been defined by
public service and the safeguarding of U.S. national security
interests. I depend every day on his love and support.
I also want to acknowledge my family and friends watching
from many different parts of the globe. As a first-generation
American, it is truly an honor and privilege to be here. In my
office I have a photograph of the shtetl in Lithuania where my
father was born, which serves as a reminder of how far and how
fast my family's journey has been.
Virtually my entire professional career has focused on
advocating for democracy and human rights internationally. This
work is not easy, nor does it bring quick results. I keep close
a copy of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In a world
filled with cynicism, it is an important reminder of the United
Nations' potential.
I know firsthand about the United Nations' imperfections.
While at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, my
intellectual home for many years, I investigated the
trafficking of women and girls in and around peacekeeping
missions in Bosnia and Kosovo. But this work also brought me
into contact with brave U.N. officers dedicated to advancing
gender equality and human rights.
I have seen firsthand that when the United Nations works
best, we can effectively work with partners to promote our
interests and values. During the 4 years I served at USAID in
the Bureau for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian
Assistance, my colleagues and I responded to multiple Level-3
humanitarian assistance crises. I was exposed on a daily basis
to the development, human rights, humanitarian assistance,
peacebuilding, and democracy promotion challenges confronting
various U.N. agencies, nearly all of which depend on vital U.S.
leadership and support.
My service in government also coincided with the expansion
of the digital era. From Brazil to Indonesia, from Mexico to
South Africa, the spread of affordable information and
communication technologies has helped to expose corruption and
driven demand for governments to be more transparent and
accountable to their citizens. Initiatives such as the Open
Government Partnership, launched by President Obama and seven
other heads of state at the U.N. in 2011, reflect this growing
international movement of civic-based activism.
This digital era has been met also with a backlash, a
closing of public space around civil society where governments
are threatened by the increased empowerment of citizens. There
are many dimensions to closing space including onerous
requirements on nongovernmental organizations, the targeting of
journalists, national legal measures targeting the LGBT
community, the rise of anti-Semitism and targeting of religious
minorities, and the murder of activists dedicated to exposing
abuse.
I know from my travels around Africa, Asia, Europe,
Eurasia, and Latin America just how much members of vulnerable
and marginalized populations look to the United States and the
United Nations for leadership and pushing back on such
repression. If confirmed, I pledge to work with U.N. agencies
and like-minded member states to mobilize support for and
address this issue and give voice to those who have been
silenced.
If confirmed, I will also continue the work I began over 15
years ago on human trafficking, elevating the need to combat
modern slavery as a vital 21st century development challenge.
The global movement has made great strides, yet as this
committee has recognized under the chairman's leadership, there
is more work to be done to strengthen international efforts to
address human trafficking. The U.S. role, as this committee has
also noted, is critical. The United Nations has an important
role to play as a platform to expand and broaden constituencies
engaged in ending slavery.
If confirmed, I will work with the leadership of U.N.
agencies in New York to combat human trafficking, and support
smart investments that lead to sound development outcomes and
elevate the focus on women and girls. I will work with
colleagues across the U.N. system to deliver assistance to
those experiencing food insecurity and displacement, and join
others in the quest for greater resilience in the face of
disaster.
As the world finalizes its commitments for the Post-2015
Development Agenda, I will work with the leadership of U.N.
agencies, funds, programs, and member states for meaningful
implementation of the goals. We must never forget that
inclusion, sound governance, sustainable environmental
practices, and respect for human rights are the essential
foundations for achieving and sustaining development.
And finally, across the full spectrum of the issues and
activities in my portfolio, I will contribute actively to this
administration's fight against the disproportionate bias that
remains persistent in the U.N. system targeting Israel.
If confirmed, I would be honored to join the
administration's commitment and efforts to make the United
Nations live up to its potential and further American values
and ideals. Working with this committee and others in the
administration, I would do my utmost to help the U.N. address
humanitarian challenges and meet opportunities to make the
world more secure.
Thank you. I look forward to answering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Mendelson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Sarah E. Mendelson
Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, distinguished members,
thank you for the opportunity to appear before you as President Obama's
nominee to be the United States Representative to the Economic and
Social Council of the United Nations. I am grateful to President Obama,
Secretary Kerry, and Ambassador Power for this opportunity and for
their confidence in me.
I would like to acknowledge my husband, John Harvey, who is here
with me today, and whose career has been defined by public service and
the safeguarding of U.S. national security interests. I depend every
day on his love and support. I also want to acknowledge my family and
friends watching from many different parts of the globe. As a first
generation American, it is truly an honor and privledge to be here. In
my office, I have a photograph of the shtetl in Lithuania where my
father was born, which serves as a reminder of how far and fast my
family's journey has been.
Virtually my entire professional career has focused on advocating
for democracy and human rights internationally. This work is not easy,
and nor does it bring quick results. I keep close a copy of the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. In a world filled with cynicism,
it is an important reminder of the United Nations' potential. I know
first-hand about the U.N.'s imperfections: while at the Center for
Strategic and International Studies, my intellectual home of many
years, I investigated the trafficking of women and girls in and around
peacekeeping missions in Bosnia and Kosovo. But this work also brought
me into contact with brave U.N. officers dedicated to advancing gender
equality and human rights.
I have seen firsthand that when the United Nations works best, we
can effectively work with partners to promote our interests and values.
During the 4 years I served at USAID in the Bureau for Democracy,
Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, my colleagues and I responded to
multiple Level-3 humanitarian crises. I was exposed on a daily basis to
the development, human rights, humanitarian assistance, peace-building,
and democracy promotion challenges confronting various U.N. agencies,
nearly all of which depend on vital U.S. leadership and support.
My service in government also coincided with the expansion of the
digital era. From Brazil to Indonesia, from Mexico to South Africa, the
spread of affordable information and communication technologies has
helped to expose corruption and driven demand for governments to be
more transparent and accountable to their citizens. Initiatives such as
the Open Government Partnership, launched by President Obama and seven
other heads of state at the U.N. in 2011, reflect this growing
international movement of civic-based activism.
This digital era has been met with a backlash, a closing of public
space around civil society where governments are threatened by the
increased empowerment of citizens. There are many dimensions to closing
space including onerous requirements on nongovernmental organizations,
the targeting of journalists, national legal measures targeting the
LGBT community, the rise of anti-Semitism and targeting of religious
minorities, and the murder of activists dedicated to exposing abuse.
President Obama addressed government restrictions on civil society
during the high-level week at the U.N. General Assembly in 2013 and
2014. The U.N. Human Rights Council adopted resolutions on the issue in
2013 and 2014. I know from my travels around Africa, Asia, Europe,
Eurasia, and Latin America just how much members of vulnerable and
marginalized populations look to the United States and the United
Nations for leadership in pushing back on such repression. If
confirmed, I pledge to work with U.N. agencies and like-minded member
states to mobilize support for and address this issue and give voice to
those who have been silenced.
If confirmed, I will also continue the work I began over 15 years
ago on human trafficking, elevating the need to combat modern slavery
as a vital 21st century development challenge. The global movement has
made great strides, yet as this committee has recognized under the
chairman's leadership, there is more work to be done to strengthen
international efforts to address human trafficking. The U.S. role, as
this committee has also noted, is critical. The U.N. has an important
role to play as a platform to expand and broaden constituencies engaged
in ending slavery.
If confirmed, I will work with the leadership of U.N. agencies in
New York to combat human trafficking, and support smart investments
that lead to sound development outcomes and elevate the focus on women
and girls. I will work with colleagues across the U.N. system to
deliver assistance to those experiencing food insecurity and
displacement, and join others in the quest for greater resilience in
the face of disaster. As the world finalizes its commitments for the
Post-2015 Development Agenda, I will work with the leadership of U.N.
agencies, funds, programs, and member states for meaningful
implementation of the goals. We must never forget that inclusion, sound
governance, sustainable environmental practices, and respect for human
rights are the essential foundations for achieving and sustaining
development.
And, finally, across the full spectrum of the issues and activities
in my portfolio, I will contribute actively to this administration's
fight against the disproportionate bias that remains persistent in the
U.N.-system targeting Israel.
If confirmed, I would be honored to join the administration's
commitment and efforts to make the United Nations live up to its
potential and further American values and ideals. Working with this
committee, and others in the administration, I would do my utmost to
help the U.N. address humanitarian challenges and meet opportunities to
make the world more secure.
Thank you. I look forward to answering your questions.
The Chairman. Thank you both very much.
We will now have 5 minutes of questioning by each of the
Senators who wish to do so.
Ambassador Bond, a number of American families adopting
Congolese children are stuck in the DRC exit permit suspension.
I know you are very aware of that. Yesterday there was an
announcement where numbers of cases were going to be approved.
They are waiting on authorization by President Kabila, I guess,
at this moment.
Can you tell us a little bit about what you think the best
strategy will be for you to deal with this issue with the DRC
and getting adopted children out of the country?
Ms. Bond. Thank you for that question, Senator. As you may
know, I visited Kinshasa in March and had an opportunity to
meet with several of the waiting families who have actually
moved to the DRC in order to live with their children while
they wait for action by those officials. But there are hundreds
of other families who are not able to do that and who are
waiting in the United States to be able to bring their children
home.
While I was in Kinshasa, I met with a Member of their
Parliament and with a number of senior officials in the
government to press them to take action now on these cases, and
I emphasized to them the fact that it is not a matter of
indifference. Every single day that passes is a cost, a real
cost, and in some ways an irreparable one, to the children who
are losing ground because they are not in the families that are
waiting for them, who have adopted them and would give them the
kind of love and support that every child needs.
As you say, there was a meeting yesterday between U.S.
Embassy officials and the head of the DRC Adoption Inter-
Ministerial Commission, and a member of the Ministry of Foreign
Affairs was also there. They reported that the Commission has
approved a number of cases of children adopted by citizens of
the United States, and also families from Canada, France,
Italy, and the Netherlands. They say that those have been
reviewed by the Commission and passed to President Kabila for
his action.
They suggested that a decision could come as early as next
week, and we are pressing that administration hard to make a
decision on these children, the first tranche, but on every
single case to get those kids home to their families.
It has been suggested by one of the members of the
Commission that they believe that having succeeded in creating
this first tranche and moving those names and files to the
President, that they will be able to move more quickly on
subsequent cases. They have established their process now, and
I hope that is true, but we are indeed going to be pushing them
to recognize that this is an urgent matter. This is something
that needs to be done in a matter of hours or days, not weeks
and months.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Dr. Mendelson, can you tell us a little bit about ECOSOC's
role in combating slavery and talk to us a little bit about how
you plan to pursue this issue when confirmed?
Dr. Mendelson. Thank you, Senator, and thank you for your
leadership on combating trafficking. It is widely appreciated,
and that of the committee.
ECOSOC is a broad portfolio. Trafficking is a global
problem. We need a global platform to address it, and I think
ECOSOC presents an excellent opportunity.
Very specifically, we need, as you have widely recognized,
we need every Ambassador to be engaging on this issue. We need
every mission to be thinking about this and being champions for
this. The SDG process, the Sustainable Development Goals
process, actually provides an opportunity. There is a lot of
language particularly focused around ending the trafficking of
minors, and I have seen how when countries commit to the goals,
assistance follows. It is my expectation that, and I would be a
champion if confirmed, to make sure that those commitments
include a focus on combating child trafficking and raising this
issue, using the convening power to bring missions together and
leadership.
The Chairman. Are there some specific countries that you
think would be best for us to work with? Name some of them. I
know you cannot name all of them, but obviously we want to put
together a global effort. Hopefully we have the beginning
stages of that now. But what are some of the other countries
around the world that you think care deeply about this issue
which would be great partners for the United States?
Dr. Mendelson. We have very close relations with the United
Kingdom, with many Nordic countries. Surprisingly, those
development agencies are not already committed to combating
trafficking. In my travels in my job at USAID, I met with
foreign officials many times urging that this be a focus, and
there was some resistance. So I think there is work to be done.
I think this platform will be, if confirmed, a wonderful
opportunity to work with missions again through the commitment
that is involved with the Sustainable Development Goals.
I think you are going to find that countries are going to
turn to say, yes, we are going to commit to this, and it will
come on to their radar, come on to their agenda. So Sweden,
with whom we have very close cooperation, would be a target,
other Scandinavian countries, and certainly the United Kingdom.
The Chairman. Thank you both.
Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, I thank both of you for your service.
Dr. Mendelson, you mentioned the vital U.S. leadership and
support. That was particularly true in the Trafficking in
Persons, the TIP report, the gold standard. I look at that
foreign beat with guests from other countries to see how they
are doing, and the United States has really provided, I think,
the international leadership to make a huge difference in
trafficking.
I want to see us do the same thing on corruption. I was
proud that in the State Department reauthorization that this
committee took up, we started to take steps to require the
State Department to analyze the status of corruption in
countries around the world.
So I want to focus on the Millennium Development Goals just
for one moment. If I had Ambassador Bond's husband, spouse
here, I think he would tell us the problems in Ukraine was not
so much the relationship with Russia and the European Union, it
was more about corruption. After the revolution, people were
very optimistic, but then they got a corrupt government, and
that caused many of the problems. If we look at the deep
problems in Russia today, the motivation there is more
corruption than anything else, and I could go through so many
other countries around the world.
So we have a chance with the Millennium Development Goals,
and there is a commitment to deal with human rights and
corruption, but it seems buried. So I would like to get your
commitment to be a fighter on this issue. You have a great
tradition on human rights. This is our opportunity.
So, are you going to be a fighter to make sure that we have
this as a visible goal under the Millennium Development to make
sure that we can make some progress internationally on this
corrosive human rights issue?
Dr. Mendelson. Thank you, Senator, for the focus on
corruption. I very much share your sense of urgency on this
issue. I think it is one that the human rights community in
general is gradually beginning to spend more attention to. I
note also that there is a large transparency and accountability
community that does not always talk to the human rights
community. You mentioned Ukraine and, of course, the Dignity
Revolution. The Euromaidan was about precisely demanding
transparency and accountability, and I think that there are
very brave people today who are still working on these issues.
I promise you that in Sustainable Development Goal number
16, that has good governance, sound governance and
anticorruption in it, it will be an enormous priority. It is
something that I spoke to Ambassador Power about when we were
talking about this possibility, and I know she shares the
commitment. So, yes, I promise.
Senator Cardin. How about getting in the top five rather
than number 16? I hope that you will work for that.
Ambassador Bond, people who want to come to the United
States, spend money, learn about our way, advance U.S. goals
which are basically global values, we make it so tough. It
costs a lot of money. It takes a lot of time. What vision do
you have to make it easier for people who want to visit the
United States to be able to get through the bureaucratic
process of obtaining a visa?
Ms. Bond. Thank you, Senator. What a good question, because
that is one of our primary goals too. We have to screen
visitors who are applying to come to the United States because
we need to know who they are before we can give them permission
to come. However, we also want to do everything we can to
facilitate legitimate travel. We want to bring those travelers
to the United States, and we want to encourage them to come
back again and again.
So one of the things that we do is we try to make sure, and
we have invested significant resources--people, training, real
estate--into making sure that if someone notifies us that he is
interested in getting a visa to the United States, we interview
that person as quickly as possible at a date that is convenient
for them.
As you may know, in November, President Obama and the
President of China jointly announced that they were going to
extend the validity of visas for tourists and business
travelers from 1 year to 10. And since then, just in the months
since November, we have seen a 53-percent increase in the
number of new applications for visas to come to the United
States. Millions of people are traveling to the United States,
and because they will have a 10-year visa, they can plan ahead.
They can say, hey, next year is our anniversary, and let's plan
to go to San Francisco. Next year is whatever, 5 years from now
is whatever.
So we are doing everything we can to encourage travelers
who have been vetted and examined so that we know that they are
not a risk to the United States. We want them to come and we
want them to see as much of the country as they can and spend
their money.
Senator Cardin. Also take a look at your computer system.
It has broken down many times. You need to have a more reliable
way to be able to handle this. If it is not working, a person
may have traveled overnight to get to one of our locations only
to find they have to come back another day. It just makes no
sense, and we have to provide better service.
I want to do the screening--we have to do that--but we
could do it in a more friendly way, and I would just urge you
to make that the highest priority.
Last point, Mr. Chairman, just to comment.
Thank you for mentioning your commitment for Israel. There
is no question that there is only one country that will stand
up to the discriminatory actions that the international
community in this international organization has focused on
Israel, and the United States must remain firm against those
discriminatory actions taken in the international community.
So, thank you very much for mentioning that today.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Isakson.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you
very much for calling this hearing today. I know U.N.
Ambassador Power is very interested in Dr. Mendelson getting to
New York as fast as she can, particularly with the U.N. session
beginning this summer, so I hope we can move this forward, and
I appreciate very much your willingness to call it.
I want to follow up on what Senator Cardin said, Dr.
Mendelson. Your statement says, ``I will contribute actively to
this administration's fight against the disproportionate bias
that remains persistent in the U.N. system targeting Israel,''
and I want to thank you for including it both in your printed
remarks as well as your verbal remarks today, because there are
significant biases against Israel in the U.N. If we do not
stand strong with our partner Israel, we could have some big
problems.
In particular, I think it is U.S. policy, at least my
recollection is it is our stated policy of this administration
that any recognition of a Palestinian state should be
negotiated between the State of Israel and the State of
Palestine, not determined by a third party. Is that correct?
Dr. Mendelson. Thank you, Senator, for raising this issue.
It is, again, a key issue that Ambassador Power and I discussed
when this opportunity arose.
You are correct, and I will fight vigorously to oppose any
possibility that erodes a two-state solution. I will fight for
the inclusion of Israel in various fora and to normalize
Israel's status at the United Nations. I will fight tirelessly
to oppose the bias that you see across the system, including in
one-sided biased resolutions.
Senator Isakson. Well, thank you very much for that
commitment, because it is absolutely necessary. I know Samantha
Power, Ambassador Power, feels exactly the same way.
Ms. Bond, you are going to be in charge of all passports.
Is that right?
Ms. Bond. Yes, sir.
Senator Isakson. I have a question for you. Every time I
turn on the television or read anything about ISIL and about
lone wolves, I read about Americans going to Syria for training
with ISIL or going into Iraq for training with ISIL. What is
the State Department doing and what role can the State
Department have through passports, visas, and the like to track
people who are doing that, or to curtail the access to be able
to do that for American citizens going to that part of the
world for that purpose?
Ms. Bond. Sir, you have raised a very serious concern. We
recognize fundamentally the right of U.S. citizens to travel
and the importance of citizens who are interested in traveling
abroad to be able to apply for a passport and get one quickly
and efficiently.
At the same time, we also are carefully vetting every
application for a U.S. passport for us to make sure that that
person qualifies, is that person a U.S. citizen, and there are
screens in place. We work very closely with law enforcement,
with the intel community, in order to be able to identify
travelers who may be planning to travel for illegal purposes,
travel for terrorism purposes.
So there is a lot of coordination within the government to
track known or suspected terrorists, and whether they are
foreigners applying for visas or Americans who are traveling
abroad on passports to make sure that we try to identify those
people and try to interdict their travel if we can.
Senator Isakson. I hope you are successful at accomplishing
exactly that, because it is a worrisome fact that as many
Americans as are expected or that we anticipate are trying to
find their way to Syria or to ISIL to be trained and come back
to be a threat to this country. So your role in that will be
critically important to our country's security, and I wish you
the best of luck in your future endeavors as far as Assistant
Secretary of State, as I do with Dr. Mendelson at the U.N.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator.
Look, I cannot imagine having two more highly qualified
people for these positions, and we thank you both for your
willingness to serve in this capacity and your commitment to
the kinds of issues you are going to be dealing with for a very
long time.
So, thank you for being here and having your families here.
We will make this as painless as possible, getting ready to
adjourn, and we hope other members will ask questions. We hope
that those questions will be in by noon Monday, and then you
would respond promptly to those.
But we thank you for being here. Again, we thank you for
your commitment to these issues, to our country, and your
willingness to serve in this capacity.
Senator Cardin. Thank you.
The Chairman. The meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 10:45 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Dr. Sarah Mendelson, Nominated to be U.S. Representative
on the U.N. Economic and Social Council, to Questions from Members of
the Committee
representative-designate mendelson's responses
to questions from senator corker
Question. Given the multitude of Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs), which ones should the United States prioritize?
Answer. From the outset of the process, the U.S. Government has
prioritized a universal Post-2015 Development Agenda to ensure it can
drive real impact and results on the ground. The United States is
supportive of the draft Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) because
they address a range of issues that were left out of the Millennium
Development Goals yet which are critical drivers of development such as
the role of sound governance. The United States also recognizes that
this more robust understanding of development means having a larger set
of goals and targets to work toward. The 17 goals and 169 targets
articulated in the current draft SDGs document include U.S. Government
priorities--such as the unfinished business of the MDGS; gender
equality and the empowerment of women and girls; sustainable energy;
oceans and natural resources; inclusive and sustainable economic
growth; governance and peaceful societies. The Department has
prioritized 13 areas for the Post-2015 Agenda: including Goal 16 on
peace and governance but also poverty, food security, health,
education, gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls,
economic growth, water, energy, natural resources, oceans, and global
partnerships.
Question. How will the SDGs affect the way the United States
approaches international development?
Answer. Policy decisions, priorities, and budgets of the United
States will always be made by the United States. The SDGs offer global
targets to help guide national development priorities while leaving
individual countries the space to determine their own policies about
how to meet those priorities. The draft SDGs and targets reflect issues
that have long been components of U.S. foreign assistance, including
combating human trafficking and modern slavery, fighting poverty and
hunger, promoting education and gender equality, improving access to
safe water and affordable and reliable energy, and support for
transparent, responsive and accountable democratic institutions. As the
agenda has not yet been adopted, it is too early to say how the final
agreement will impact U.S. priorities and policies, and the allocation
of U.S. resources.
Question. What is ECOSOC's role in the post-2015 Millennium
Development Goals (MDGs) development agenda and how will the Council
contribute to the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals
(SDGs)?
Answer. The Millennium Development Goals were introduced in 2000
and span a 15-year period that concludes this year. The Post-2015
Development Agenda, including the Sustainable Development Goals, are
currently being negotiated through an intergovernmental process under
the auspices of the General Assembly. The importance of a robust
followup and review framework is one of the key lessons learned from
the experience with the MDGs, and as the U.N. organ mandated to conduct
followup and review of conferences and summits relating to development,
economic, social, and environmental issues, ECOSOC will play a key role
in monitoring implementation of the SDGs. Analysis of specific areas of
the SDGs will occur throughout the year in ECOSOC's functional
commissions and subsidiary bodies (e.g., Commission on the Status of
Women or the U.N. Forum on Forests). ECOSOC will also conduct an annual
review of the SDGs at the High Level Political Forum (except every 4
years when the High Level Political Forum will meet under the auspices
of the General Assembly).
Question. What were the biggest hurdles to the implementation of
the Millennium Development Goals and what lessons can be learned as the
U.N. transitions to the Sustainable Development Goals?
Answer. In addition to being a powerful symbol of a global
commitment to eradicating extreme poverty, hunger, and disease, the
MDGs served as a motivating
set of goals to drive common action and have helped reap remarkable
progress for global development. Even when particular MDG targets were
not met, such shortcomings served to catalyze additional global action.
For example, on child survival, the 2012 Child Survival Call to Action,
which resulted in a new pledge to end deaths of children under 5 by
2035, stemmed from a recognition that MDG 4 (reducing child mortality)
would not be reached by 2015.
It is worth noting that overall, since 1990, extreme poverty has
been cut by more than half with nearly 900 million people rising above
the $1.25-a-day line. Per capita incomes in the developing world more
than doubled. A child born today is twice as likely to survive into
adolescence as in 1990; malnutrition has been cut by 40 percent; youth
literacy has been cut by 39 percent, and lack of access to modern
energy services has fallen by a third.
The Millennium Development Goals helped advance the U.S.
development agenda in a number of key areas. The MDGs helped pull
people out of extreme poverty, especially those who were just below the
extreme poverty line, but often not the most marginalized and extreme
poor. In the follow-on effort, the United States will be working to
incorporate additional areas considered key to the U.S. development
agenda, including a focus on sound governance, institutions and peace,
particularly in fragile and post-conflict states, in generating
sustainable development, and on gender and environmental issues. One
criticism of the MDGs was that they were too narrowly defined in that
they did not take into account development writ large. In some cases,
this led to siloed approaches rather than a more holistic, integrated
approach. In the Post-2015 development agenda, the United States will
work to ensure that issues that cut across multiple areas of focus,
such as health, gender, transparency and accountability, and education,
are addressed in an integrated manner.
Question. If confirmed, what will be your role in determining the
success of
the SDGs and more specifically, how do you think they should be
measured and evaluated?
Answer. The United States is closely engaged in the efforts of the
U.N. Statistical Commission to develop a comprehensive multilateral
framework to measure, evaluate, followup, and review progress on the
SDGs. The U.S Government supports an indicator and monitoring framework
that is science-based, with an elevated focus on data. It should also
be practical and achievable; one that enables evidence-based
decisionmaking in support of the agenda at all levels. Because
implementing the SDGs will mean different things in different contexts,
the monitoring and evaluation framework needs to be flexible rather
than overly prescriptive, focused on outcomes, and one that
accommodates different structures and challenges. Reporting and
evaluation of progress should occur at the national, regional, and
global levels, and it should be a collaborative effort between the
U.N., its member states, and various subnational public and private
actors, including nongovernmental organizations. The objective of
follow up and review is to support decisionmakers, inform policy
choices, and mobilize partnerships for implementation, thereby
supporting the successful implementation of the goals.
The administration hopes to build on and improve its experience
with the MDGs regarding followup and review, including by
disaggregating data appropriately according to key demographic
variables including sex, age, and disability status, and sharing data
in an open, dynamic, real-time manner to maximize its relevance and the
decisionmakers' ability to act on it. Increased availability and more
effective use of data to monitor and drive sustainable development in
real time, including on issues that have not previously benefited from
an elevated focus on data such as sound governance or combating human
trafficking, have the potential to be the game-changing innovation of
the next decade. If confirmed, I would actively participate in how
implementation and evaluation decisions are shaped and contribute to
decisionmaking about how to measure the success of the SDGs.
Question. ECOSOC Resolution 2008/33, ``Strengthening coordination
of the United Nations and other efforts in fighting trafficking in
persons'' urged ``. . . all States, individually and through
international cooperation, as well as the United Nations system, to
increase, in a coherent, comprehensive and coordinated manner, efforts
to counter trafficking in persons.''
Given that ECOSOC is on record with regard to combating
human trafficking, what specific followup has ECOSOC taken with
regard to this resolution and what additional steps can ECOSOC
take to address human trafficking?
Answer. Thank you for the question, Senator. As you point out, the
Economic and Social Council has been active on the issue of combating
human trafficking and, if confirmed, I will continue that effort as I
recognize we all have a long way to go in addressing this critical
human rights issue. In 2006, the United Nations General Assembly set up
an Inter-Agency Coordination Group against Trafficking in Persons
(``ICAT''), comprising 17 U.N. agencies and related organizations, with
ECOSOC coordinating on this issue within the U.N. system. The ICAT
includes agencies such as the International Organization for Migration
(IOM), the International Labor Organization (ILO), UNICEF, the U.N.
Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), and the U.N.
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR).
Attention to trafficking issues through the ICAT and at ECOSOC, its
subsidiary bodies, and other U.N. organizations has provided a useful
way to highlight best practices in addressing trafficking in persons.
For example, earlier this year, the United States and other delegations
cosponsored a panel discussion with the ILO on forced labor, the
vulnerability of workers to exploitation, and the impact on national
and global development.
Numerous other initiatives to counter trafficking in persons have
occurred throughout the U.N. system. If confirmed, I will continue this
sustained engagement, using the platform of the USUN mission to elevate
the issue and highlight the need for additional action to combat
trafficking. I appreciate very much the efforts of this committee to
address the problem of human trafficking and modern slavery and, if
confirmed, look forward to working closely with you to achieve impact
on this important issue.
__________
NOMINATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JULY 15, 2015
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Foreign Relations,
Washington, DC.
----------
Laura Farnsworth Dogu, of Texas, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Nicaragua
Hon. Roberta S. Jacobson, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the
United Mexican States
Perry L. Holloway, of South Carolina, to be Ambassador to the
Cooperative Republic of Guyana
Peter F. Mulrean, of Massachusetts, to be Ambassador to the
Republic of Haiti
----------
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:52 p.m., in
room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio
presiding.
Present: Senators Rubio, Flake, and Menendez.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA
Senator Rubio. The hearing today is to consider the U.S.
Ambassador nominees to Guyana, Nicaragua, Mexico, and Haiti.
All of these countries face different challenges, and I look
forward to discussing them with our nominees today.
I want to thank all of our nominees for their dedication to
public service, and welcome their families and friends who are
present here today.
In a moment, I will recognize Ranking Member Boxer upon her
return for opening remarks. The Senate is currently in the
middle of a series of votes, and in a moment, I want to address
that with each of you. But she will be here in a moment.
Our nominees are Mr. Perry Lee Holloway. He is the nominee
to Guyana. He is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service
who most recently served as political military counsel to the
U.S. Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan.
Ms. Laura Farnsworth Dogu is the nominee to Nicaragua. She
is a career member of the Senior Foreign Service and currently
serves as the deputy chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in
Mexico City.
Ms. Roberta Jacobson is the nominee to Mexico, and she is
also a career member of the Senior Foreign Service and is
currently the Assistant Secretary of State for Western
Hemisphere.
I would add that I am sorry to hear about your son's recent
accident, but we pray that he will have a speedy recovery, and
we know it has been a difficult few days for you.
And Mr. Peter Mulrean is the nominee to Haiti, and he is
also a career member of the Senior Foreign Service and
currently serves as deputy chief of mission of the U.S. mission
to the United Nations in Geneva.
Let me just say at the outset, I was hoping we might just
dispense today with opening statements, unless any of you feel
passionately about making them. They are written and in the
record. The problem is that at 5 o'clock, there is an all-
members meeting on the Authorization for Use of Military Force,
so we will have to stop this hearing in less than about an hour
and 5 minutes. And with votes going on, we are going to have
members coming in and out.
So unless any of you feel passionately about the need to
read your opening statements in the record, they have been duly
noted, and I will just begin with questions.
I will start with Ms. Jacobson.
Mexico, as I know you believe and understand, is an
important friend and ally in dealing with a wide range of
bilateral and hemispheric issues. We share close cultural and
economic and security ties with them. And that is why I think
all Americans are very concerned about the events of this past
week.
On Saturday, their most notorious drug lord, Joaquin ``El
Chapo'' Guzman broke out of a high-security prison on Saturday
night for the second time, escaping in a tunnel built right
under his cell despite, according to press reports, the Mexican
authorities having been warned by the DEA as early as 2014
about his escape plans. So given this and given El Chapo's
history of escape, his reported limitless resources, and the
known corruption within the justice system and parts of Mexico,
are you aware if the Department of Justice formally submitted
an extradition request to the Department of State for El Chapo
Guzman?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
And thank you for your good wishes on my son. I greatly
appreciate that.
We are incredibly frustrated and disappointed by the escape
of Chapo Guzman. We obviously, along with the Mexican
Government, will work in support of the Mexican Government to
recapture him as quickly as possible.
What I can say is that obviously we are always interested
in the extradition of criminal suspects in other countries who
face charges in the United States. And there were pending
charges against Joaquin ``El Chapo'' Guzman in the United
States. And further detail, I cannot get into in terms of
pending or possible extradition matters. Those are matters that
the Justice Department would have to respond to that. But we
can say that we are always interested in the extradition of
those who face multiple serious crimes in the United States.
Senator Rubio. Let me switch to another topic. According to
the International Christian Concern and Christian Solidarity
Worldwide, religious intolerance frequently characterized by
violence and forced displacement are common in the states of
Oaxaca, Guerrero, Puebla, Hidalgo, and Chiapas. These religious
freedom groups have pointed out that state government officials
tasked with dealing with these kinds of issues and cases often
have little or no training in human rights or religious
freedom, leading to the proliferation of these types of abuses
in violation of Mexico's Constitution.
So, if confirmed, will you prioritize the issue of
religious freedom and tolerance in Mexico? And what approach
will you take to engage the Mexican Government on the state and
federal levels to support efforts to train government officials
on religious freedom and other basic human rights and upholding
the rule of law?
STATEMENT OF ROBERTA S. JACOBSON, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE UNITED MEXICAN STATES
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Certainly, I would make that a priority, as I think it is
one for this administration. I do think that we appreciated
your staff bringing these cases to our attention. The Embassy
has already raised these issues at the federal and state level,
and I would, certainly, prioritize continuing to do so with the
Mexican Government as well as with civil society organizations.
Senator Rubio. Before I pivot to one of the other nominees,
I wanted to briefly discuss your existing record of service to
our country by examining for a moment the Venezuela Defense of
Human Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014, which imposed
targeted sanctions on persons responsible for the violation of
human rights of antigovernment protesters in Venezuela. As you
know, the President eventually signed this bill into law.
Could you tell us a little bit about your role in the
administration's decisionmaking about the implementation of
this legislation, specifically, which individuals would be
sanctioned, et cetera? What role did you play in that process?
Ms. Jacobson. In the process of developing the names that
would be sanctioned under that law, and remember we are talking
about two kinds of sanctions, as you well know, of course, both
visa sanctions and financial sanctions, visa sanctions, we had
already at the time of the passage of the law and subsequently,
we have sanctioned a total of, I believe, 62 Venezuelan
individuals. And those names were generated by a combination of
various offices within the interagency community as well as our
Embassy in Caracas.
The same process is used for the list that is developed for
financial sanctions, working, in particular, with the Treasury
Department as well as other entities of the U.S. Government.
And as those names are developed, the Assistant Secretary is
not in the position of actually reviewing and saying particular
names should go on or off, but a list is presented after the
interagency has come up with the most information they can on
candidates.
So I did see the list of names once it had been developed
by the interagency community.
Senator Rubio. In specifics, Diosdado Cabello, who is the
president of the National Assembly of Venezuela, and perhaps
the most corrupt individual in Venezuela, which is a very high
mark, was not included in that list.
Is there any insight you can provide as to why he was not
included?
Ms. Jacobson. I really cannot. I know that there is a
standard of information that is reviewed, and whether someone
is on the list or not on the list depends on the kind of
information that various agencies may have. So I cannot say why
his name would or would not be on the list when that list would
come to me or others to approve it.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jacobson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Roberta S. Jacobson
Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Boxer, and members of the committee,
it is a great honor and privilege to appear before you today as
President Obama's nominee to serve as the next United States Ambassador
to Mexico. I am deeply appreciative of the confidence the President and
Secretary Kerry have placed in me by my nomination. I am also very
grateful for the support of my family, beginning with my husband,
Jonathan, and our sons, Gil and Daniel.
I have spent my entire 30-year career with the Department of State
working on the relationship between the United States and the Americas/
Western Hemisphere. As Director of the Office of Mexican Affairs for
nearly 5 years, I became acutely aware of Mexico's gravitational pull
on the gamut of U.S. interests in Latin America.
That relationship is unique in its enormous breadth and complexity
and in its direct impact on the security, prosperity, and well-being of
U.S. citizens every day. All evidence points to an even more
interdependent future for our two countries. Almost $1.5 billion in
trade crosses the U.S.-Mexico border each day, supporting millions of
U.S. jobs. Hundreds of thousands of people cross our nearly 2,000-mile
long border legally each day and Mexico is, by far, the top foreign
destination for American travelers. Fully 10 percent of all Americans--
more than 33 million--are of Mexican heritage. The Mexican-American
community is a vital part of our culture, our politics, and our values.
I led the team that worked closely with you in Congress to develop
the U.S. proposal for the Merida Initiative, negotiated with Cabinet-
level Mexican counterparts, and supervised the delivery of U.S.
training and equipment over a 4-year period that gave Mexico an equity
partnership in supporting our mutual security needs. We now have an
unprecedented level of cooperation that is a model for security
partnerships everywhere. In my 4 years as Assistant Secretary of State
for Western Hemisphere Affairs, I have remained deeply engaged in all
aspects of our complex ties with Mexico and I am deeply honored that
the President has nominated me to serve as Ambassador to Mexico.
If I am confirmed, I will continue to lead our team in further
nurturing U.S. interests in Mexico. And while every nominee looks
forward to working with, and seeking the advice and counsel of, this
committee and the Congress, Mexico is a special case: This body enjoys
its own wealth of experience on Mexico, and I intend to mine that
wisdom to advance U.S. interests in all aspects of our relationship. My
Job One, of course, is to secure and protect our mission personnel and
their families as they serve our country in Mexico.
If confirmed as Ambassador, I will continue this administration's
focus on a number of key priorities. The first will be to advance U.S.
economic competitiveness and deepening the economic ties that are so
central to opportunities, good jobs, and growth. And those ties are
indeed impressive: two-way trade in goods and services reached $592
billion in 2014--that is more than $1.5 billion daily. Mexican exports
to the United States contain on average 40 percent U.S. content. The
United States buys more than 70 percent of Mexican crude oil exports
and supplies Mexico with refined products and natural gas. Now, more
than ever, there are increased opportunities for close partnerships
between the United States and Mexico. In May 2013, Presidents Obama and
Pena Nieto established two new mechanisms--the High Level Economic
Dialogue and the Bilateral Forum on Higher Education, Innovation, and
Research--to promote economic opportunities, education and research
collaboration, and North American competitiveness. The United States
and Mexico are both committed to expanding trade and investment
throughout the Asia-Pacific region through the Trans-Pacific
Partnership trade agreement.
It will also be essential to reinforce American security through
continued cooperation and partnership under the Merida Initiative. The
Initiative represents a new chapter in the history of our relationship;
one explicitly based on mutual respect and on shared responsibility for
combating transnational criminal networks and protecting our citizens
from the crime, corruption, and violence they generate. Neither of us
can do this alone--nor, under these two administrations, do we have to.
The State Department has forged strong partnerships to improve civilian
security in affected areas to fight drug trafficking, organized crime,
corruption, illicit arms trafficking, money laundering, and demand for
drugs on both sides of the border. The U.S. Government also is
accelerating efforts to support and hold accountable the institutions
that are essential to a stable society--police, justice systems, and
civil society organizations--to adequately protect and defend the rule
of law and human rights. If confirmed, I will focus on these efforts as
the United States continues to promote respect for human rights and the
rule of law through our continued high-level diplomatic engagement
The border is the seam where cooperation is most important to U.S.
interests. Improving our ports of entry ensures the safe and efficient
flow of people and goods, vital to our economy and that of Mexico. We
are committed to bringing our border infrastructure into the 21st
century. We have renovated and expanded one of the world's largest
border crossings at the San Ysidro port of entry near San Diego, where
50,000 vehicles and 25,000 pedestrians enter the United States each
day, as part of ongoing efforts to make crossings as efficient and
secure as possible in support of economic growth and development. We
are building an innovative pedestrian terminal that will cross the
border at the Tijuana Airport to facilitate and expand regional travel
for business and pleasure. Nearly 40 percent of the Mexican produce we
buy in U.S. supermarkets passes through the Nogales, Arizona, crossing,
and our renovations will expedite this vital trade. As we address
Mexico's role in legal and clandestine migration to the United States,
we must ensure orderly, safe, and lawful migration and protect the most
vulnerable migrants. We also must continue close collaboration to
address the enomenon of unaccompanied children from Central America.
The United States enjoys robust and historic people-to-people ties
with Mexico, to our benefit. We are focused on tapping that great human
potential to enrich us both economically and culturally. More than
4,000 U.S. and Mexican students, teachers, and scholars have
participated in our binational Fulbright-Garcia Robles program since
1948, and the United States is the top destination for Mexican students
studying abroad. The United States and Mexico can accomplish great
things together; through educational exchange, English language
learning, professional training, and leadership development we can
deepen people-to-people ties, develop a 21st century workforce, and
expand economic opportunities for our citizens. I will build upon the
success of President Obama's 100,000 Strong in the Americas initiative
and other innovative ways that expand the opportunities for Americans
and Mexicans to build a common future.
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you again for the
opportunity to appear before you today. If confirmed, I will continue
to work diligently to cement the U.S. partnership with Mexico. Muchas
gracias, and I will be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Rubio. Ms. Dogo.
Am I pronouncing this correctly? Is it Dogu?
STATEMENT OF LAURA FARNSWORTH DOGU, NOMINATED TO
BE AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF NICARAGUA
Ms. Dogu. Yes, sir.
Senator Rubio. Okay, thank you. I just want to make sure I
did not mess it up the first time I said it.
So thank you for your service to our country and for your
willingness to continue to serve.
I wanted to ask you your thoughts on the potential of a
canal that would act similarly to the Panama Canal and connect
the Pacific Ocean and the Caribbean Sea through Nicaragua. What
are the potential economic and environmental impacts this
project can bring to the area?
Ms. Dogu. Thank you for your question, Mr. Chairman.
I have been following the situation with the canal as I
have been preparing for this hearing today. Clearly, the United
States Government is interested in that, and there are
potentially large economic and environmental impacts. We are
concerned with the lack of transparency as this project has
been moving forward at this point, and we are watching that
very, very carefully.
At this point, we actually do not see that there are
sufficient funds to start the construction of the canal at this
time. There have been no investors identified other than one
company, and we are not sure how that is going to play out.
But if confirmed, I will continue to monitor that situation
carefully.
Senator Rubio. If you are confirmed, I am sure you are
aware that there are a number of outstanding property claims
from United States citizens against the Nicaraguan Government.
If confirmed, what will be your strategy or your approach
to helping with these claims that U.S. citizens currently have
against that government?
Ms. Dogu. Thank you, sir. Yes, I have been monitoring that
situation as well.
The 527 claim situation is actually in a very good position
at this time. It appears that we may be close to resolving the
last of those cases for the continuous claimants. Those are
people who were U.S. citizens at the time their property was
confiscated. There are, however, still many other cases of
people who have become U.S. citizens since their property was
confiscated. And if confirmed, I will continue to work on this
through the U.S. Embassy, both through support through consular
operations and through our property office at the Embassy.
But there has been good progress made in that area, and I
will continue to work with the Government of Nicaragua to make
sure that we continue to move that forward.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Dogu follows:]
Prepared Statement of Laura F. Dogu
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, it is an honor to appear
before you today as President Obama's nominee to serve as the next
United States Ambassador to Nicaragua.
I am grateful for the trust and confidence President Obama and
Secretary of State Kerry have shown by sending my name to the Senate
for consideration. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you and
your colleagues in Congress to protect and support U.S. citizens in
Nicaragua. I will also work to promote a Nicaragua with transparent
democratic institutions and values and a commitment to human rights,
that is more economically integrated with other Central American
countries, and that collaborates effectively with us on a growing range
of issues.
Growing up, I learned firsthand about the value of serving your
country from my father, a career Navy officer who spent a lifetime
protecting America with tours of duty across the United States, abroad,
and at sea. I would also like to recognize my family, friends, and
colleagues who have guided and supported me throughout my life and
career.
In preparation for the opportunity to lead our Embassy in Managua,
I carefully reviewed White House, Department of State, and Bureau of
Western Hemisphere Affairs guidance related to advancing America's
interests in global security, inclusive economic growth, climate
change, accountable governance and freedom for all. Two points made by
President Obama and Secretary Kerry's stood out as particularly
relevant to Nicaragua.
President Obama rightly maintained, no system of government can, or
should be, imposed upon one nation by any other . . . however, the
United States is committed to governments that reflect the will of the
people. Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way,
grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume
to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick
the outcome of a peaceful election. But . . . all people yearn for
certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how
you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal
administration of justice; government that is transparent and does not
steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not
just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will
support them everywhere.
If confirmed, I will be a strong proponent for these universal
values. Nicaragua, in which human rights, democracy, and a vibrant
civil society flourish, represents the surest path to attracting direct
foreign investment and tackling endemic poverty in the country. More
importantly, the universal values reinforce the importance of the
people of Nicaragua choosing their own destiny as a people and nation.
If confirmed, the Embassy will continue to regularly maintain contact
with a wide range of Nicaraguan advocates on behalf of human, civil,
and political rights. I will also seek opportunities to make the same
case with leaders at the highest level.
Secretary Kerry said, ``. . . we have to work together to eliminate
extreme poverty through inclusive economic growth--because we know that
no society can thrive when entire segments of the population are
excluded from opportunity.''
From 1991 to 2006, three successive Nicaraguan administrations
focused on free market reform as the path to recovery after 12 years of
economic free-fall during the period of revolution and civil war. These
policies achieved macroeconomic stability, cutting inflation from
33,548 percent in 1988 to 6.43 percent in 2014. Nicaragua also
benefited from significant debt reduction through the Heavily Indebted
Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative. Since 1995, the economy has expanded
at an average annual real growth rate of 4 percent. Even so, with a
gross domestic product of $11.8 billion and a per capita income of
$1,904 in 2014, Nicaragua remains the second-poorest country in the
Western Hemisphere. Growth must almost double to significantly reduce
the rate of poverty. Such growth is possible only with strong, more
accountable public institutions.
If confirmed, I will work hard to promote trade links,
transparency, and the rule of law. Trade and investment opportunities
are mutually beneficial and open the door for greater engagement on
other essential U.S. priorities such as the development of stronger
democratic institutions.
Along these lines, the Strategy for U.S. Engagement in Central
America promotes prosperity, governance, and security. Key to Central
America's success is regional economic integration. Central America
must integrate economically in order to compete globally. Our
engagement with Nicaragua under this strategy will advance governance,
regional integration, prosperity, and security.
The occasion of my nomination as Ambassador leads me to reflect on
my Foreign Service career. In posts as far flung as El Salvador,
Turkey, Egypt, and twice in Mexico, as well as in Washington, DC, I
have led dynamic teams, which have made real progress addressing rule
of law, democracy, economic growth, transparency, and the protection of
American citizens. Taken together, this extensive experience has
prepared me to serve as Ambassador to Nicaragua if confirmed.
Mr. Chairman, committee members, I thank you again for your
consideration of my nomination and I welcome your questions.
Senator Rubio. Mr. Holloway, after the recent discovery of
oil off the coast of Guyana, Venezuela has made territorial
claims into the Caribbean Sea, including the oilfield discovery
that already belongs to Guyana.
So what is our current U.S. policy with regards to this
dispute between Venezuela and Guyana?
STATEMENT OF PERRY L. HOLLOWAY, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE COOPERATIVE REPUBLIC OF GUYANA
Mr. Holloway. Thank you, sir.
In spite of an 1899 decision, which granted most of the
territory in dispute to Guyana, Venezuela has historically
maintained claims to different parts of up to 67 percent of
Guyana and parts of the coastline. Our policy so far to date is
that we have been, as we have in many disputes like this, have
encouraged both countries to seek out a peaceful resolution,
whether it be by the U.N. or any other appropriate
international fora.
But at the same time, any country that makes claims still
has to respect the Rule of the Sea and other international
obligations, so we are monitoring it very closely.
The Venezuelans put out another statement very recently,
which replaced the one that had been done a few weeks ago. We
are still trying to analyze that and understand it better.
But we are encouraging both sides to reach a peaceful
resolution.
Senator Rubio. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Holloway follows:]
Prepared Statement of Perry L. Holloway
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the
opportunity to appear before you today. I am deeply honored that
President Obama has nominated me to serve as the United States
Ambassador to the Cooperative Republic of Guyana. If confirmed, I look
forward to working closely with this committee and all Members of
Congress to advance our Nation's interests in Guyana and the broader
Caribbean region.
I would like to take a moment to recognize the tremendous support
throughout my career from my wife, Rosaura Holloway, who is here with
me today, and my daughter Paula, who is also here, and my son Nicholas,
who could not be here. They have all benefited and suffered as a result
of my career choice, and I want to thank them for their support. I
would also like to single out my mom, Peggy Franklin, who is in South
Carolina and who laid the basic foundation for me to have the
opportunity to appear before you today.
Mr. Chairman, I have had the honor to serve our country as a
Foreign Service officer for the past 26 years in nine countries. I have
served primarily in countries in the Western Hemisphere, so I am
familiar with the types of challenges and opportunities that exist in
Guyana. I have worked on programs dealing with security, drug
trafficking, democratic values and human rights, energy and the
environment, trafficking in persons, corruption, and the exchange of
people and ideas. I have extensive experience with interagency partners
like USAID, DOD, Peace Corps, DEA, and DHS. If confirmed, I believe
that my experience in the region and my work with other agencies has
prepared me well to lead the U.S. mission in Guyana.
Guyana is a country with tremendous potential. It has vast pristine
rainforests, fertile agricultural lands, proven mineral resources,
potentially large oil reserves, and a close affinity with the United
States. It is also a country facing challenges from crime, poverty,
corruption, HIV/AIDS, natural resource management, and drug
trafficking. If confirmed, I will work with the government and people
of Guyana to confront these challenges and to continue to bolster
economic growth, strengthen democracy and governance, improve the
respect for human rights and rule of law, and promote opportunity for
all. These are clearly areas of mutual interest.
Guyana is also a key partner in bolstering regional security.
Through the President's Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, we are
cooperating to counter the threats of transnational crime and
terrorism. Improved security for all citizens of the Caribbean is
essential to the region's future stability and prosperity, as well as
to our interests. I will work closely with the appropriate agencies of
the U.S. Government to strengthen our security cooperation with Guyana.
Guyana is one of the poorest countries in the hemisphere. That is
why we have historically worked with the government and private sector
to support efforts to diversify the economy and create new
opportunities in agribusiness, aquaculture, wood products, and
ecotourism. If confirmed, I will continue to work with the government
and private sector to strengthen Guyana's market competitiveness, build
its trade capacity, improve the investment climate, and promote greater
two-way trade with the United States.
Guyana is also a leader in efforts to address global climate change
through its low carbon development strategy that is helping preserve
its vast rain forest. We have worked with the Government of Guyana to
develop sustainable forestry and ecotourism and to enhance its capacity
to implement the Reduced Emissions from Deforestation and Forest
Degradation, or REDD initiative, while also encouraging sustainable
economic development. I hope to have the opportunity to continue these
efforts.
HIV/AIDS is a problem in Guyana and the United States has made a
significant contribution to combating this disease with over $165
million invested since 2004. Our funding has made a difference.
Guyana's prevention and care programs, central laboratory, and state-
of-the-art logistics system are models for others in the region. The
program has also benefited Guyana's health systems by enhancing the
country's laboratory capacity, improving the ability to store and
distribute medicines, and strengthening the management of broader
health services. As a result of these U.S. Government investments,
Guyana now is able to respond to the threats from infectious diseases.
If confirmed, I will work with the government and other health partners
to sustain the gains we have made and transition ownership of the
programs to the Government of Guyana.
Mr. Chairman, Guyana recently held national elections and the party
that had been in power since the country's first democratic elections
nearly 23 years ago was replaced. The elections were deemed free and
fair by the international community. This is an important indicator
that Guyana is continuing to build on progress it has made since
emerging as an independent nation in 1966 and instituting multiparty
democracy in 1992. The new President and his multiethnic coalition
government have embarked on an ambitious transformative agenda for the
county that centers on eliminating racial and ethnic exclusion,
countering organized crime, combating corruption, developing
infrastructure, broadening economic growth, and establishing
sustainable management of the country's natural resources. The
government's agenda largely coincides with our own interests, providing
us new opportunities to confront long-standing challenges. I look
forward to working with all relevant actors to ensure that the
bilateral relationship continues to be one based on shared interests
and mutual respect. If confirmed, I will continue the work we have been
doing with the government and civil society on programs to strengthen
governance structures, promote constructive political dialogue, and
encourage greater citizen participation in the political process--all
necessary for a strong democracy.
The United States has a special link to Guyana through the many
Guyanese who live in our country. It is estimated that there are more
than 300,000 Guyanese in the United States and maybe another million
people here of Guyanese descent. In Guyana itself, estimates are that
over 70 percent of Guyana's citizens have family living in the United
States. If confirmed, I look forward to collaborating with the hard-
working diasporas in New York, New Jersey, Florida, and other states to
find ways that they can contribute to a more stable and prosperous
Guyana.
Guyana is a Caribbean country located in South America. The
Caribbean Community, or CARICOM, headquarters is in Guyana. If
confirmed, I would also serve as the U.S. representative to CARICOM,
whose 15 member states work together to promote regional integration
and cooperation. CARICOM has a vital role in building a secure and
prosperous Caribbean, and I look forward to working with the Secretary
General and CARICOM states to strengthen the Organization and our
relationship with it, while also advancing our common interests
throughout the Caribbean with respect to trade, investment, energy,
development, and security.
Mr. Chairman, these are just some of the opportunities and
challenges that the United States is addressing in Guyana and within
the Caribbean. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you and
your colleagues to improve the already close and productive partnership
between the United States, Guyana, and CARICOM. You can count on me to
work hard to protect American citizens, promote U.S. business in the
region, manage U.S. programs efficiently, and vigorously advance the
goals of the United States of America.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Senator Rubio. Mr. Mulrean, in the 2004 trafficking in
persons report, Haiti was listed as a Tier 2 Watchlist for
Trafficking. The majority of Haiti's cases were identified as
children in domestic servitude.
We discussed that a moment ago in a previous hearing. I
think you had a chance to watch some of that.
Haiti has been granted a waiver from being placed on a Tier
3 because it had a written plan, which would make significant
steps toward combating trafficking. How would you assess the
implementation of their plan to combat trafficking, at this
point?
STATEMENT OF PETER F. MULREAN, NOMINATED TO BE
AMBASSADOR TO THE REPUBLIC OF HAITI
Mr. Mulrean. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
As you stated, 2014 was a good year on paper for Haiti
regarding trafficking in persons. There was passage of the
antitrafficking legislation, and they created a plan for the
next 2 years, 2015 to 2017, for implementing it.
At the moment, they have begun to take positive steps, and
they have set up what looks like a whole-of-government
approach, but the proof of it will be in their execution. At
this point, the execution is nascent.
I think the government has an understanding of the
seriousness of the situation. But at this point, we are waiting
to see them take the serious steps. As with so many other
issues in Haiti, it is a question both of capacity, having the
institutional capacity whether it is with the police, even the
NGOs, and the institutional capacity to deal with these, the
judicial capacity to prosecute. But it also, sir, a question of
political will. And we are hoping, as with many other things,
that after the upcoming elections, we will have a President and
a Parliament in place that will be willing to put political
will into some of these difficult issues.
Senator Rubio. Trafficking for domestic servitude is one of
the issues that receives a tremendous amount of attention, but
there has also been extensive media reporting over the last few
years of children being sold into sex slavery, including in
makeshift brothels that exist on the border region with the
Dominican Republic.
How familiar are you with that? What is the status of that
over the last 5 years? And would that be a priority for our
Embassy in Port-au-Prince, if confirmed?
Mr. Mulrean. Well, let me start off by saying that, if
confirmed, it would absolutely be a priority, as I believe it
already is for the Embassy in Port-au-Prince.
I am not familiar with the current details of the
trafficking on the border area. We have, however, taken
significant steps in terms of our assistance programs, both on
supporting civil society to do awareness-raising and advocacy
as well as to deal with the victims of trafficking. We are also
working with the Government of Haiti to increase capacity in
identifying awareness.
There are a number of issues that have been stalled by the
current political impasse of the last 2 years, but we will give
it our utmost to move this issue forward.
Senator Rubio. As you know, cholera has already taken the
lives of over 8,900 Haitians and infected about 744,000 of
them. Given the disturbing new spike in cases of cholera in
Haiti, what initiatives is the United States undertaking or
will the United States undertake to help address ongoing
epidemic?
Mr. Mulrean. Thank you, Senator.
The incidence of cholera has seen a recent spike, but this
is after a 92 percent reduction in cases in the last couple
years. The United States has put $95 million into a program of
activities that has both been to deal with the immediate
response to the cholera cases, but in some ways even more
importantly to build into the national health system the
ability to deal with cholera and, in the future, other
communicable diseases.
We coordinate closely with other donors, and we do believe
that the situation, while troubling given the recent increase,
is not out of control.
Senator Rubio. Well, let me ask you, what will the United
States do to ensure that the United Nations is held accountable
for those already harmed by the disease?
Mr. Mulrean. Sir, the United Nations, in response to the
cholera outbreak, has been heavily engaged in the response
through the World Health Organization and others. They are in a
position, as the coordinator of a lot of assistance activities,
to ensure that the follow-through reduces cholera to a point
where it is as close to zero as can be.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Mulrean follows:]
Prepared Statement of Peter F. Mulrean
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 Kerry have placed in me by nominating me to this
important post. If confirmed, I look forward to working with you on
Haiti, a country joined with the United States by broad and deeply
rooted ties, both historical and contemporary, institutional and
individual.
I have had the privilege of serving in the Foreign Service for the
past 27 years and the great fortune to be a witness to, and
occasionally a participant in, significant developments of the past
generation. My career has taken me from the former Yugoslavia as it
crumbled, to India as it awoke economically. I have helped oversee
innovative reform programs during transitions in Eastern Europe, the
Middle East, and Afghanistan. I have worked closely with the U.N. on
humanitarian response to a series of crises and on efforts to build
peace and to defend the rights of all individuals. Reaching beyond
governments, I have learned the power of partnership with civil
society, business and the media in advancing common objectives. And as
I stand before both the challenges and opportunities in Haiti, I
believe all of this experience would serve me well if confirmed.
Throughout its history, Haiti has often been viewed as a symbol of
powerful ideas and forces. Having defeated the most formidable military
power of the time and definitively thrown off the chains of slavery,
Haiti became the second independent nation in the Western Hemisphere.
For this, Simon Bolivar praised Haiti for its contribution to the
liberation of Latin America. Diplomatic relations between the United
States and Haiti stretch back more than 150 years, and among those who
have served as U.S. Minister to the Republic of Haiti was the great
civil rights leader Frederick Douglass. The United States is also home
to a substantial and vigorous Haitian diaspora with strong patriotic
feelings. Both in their homeland and abroad, Haitians are rightly known
for their energy, resilience, creativity, pride, and strong sense of
history.
That history is marked by stirring achievements, but also by
periods of violence and misrule, which allowed human rights abuses to
go unpunished and left ground for poverty to take root. Although Haiti
is a country of vivid images, this does not mean it is always perceived
clearly by the international community. Misfortunes such as hurricanes,
disease, and the devastating 2010 earthquake are too often what put
Haiti on the front pages. But the United States recognizes that while
challenges and problems are part of Haiti's reality, they are not the
sum of Haiti's reality. Having helped address Haiti's immediate
humanitarian needs in the wake of the earthquake, the United States is
focused on supporting the country's longer term development, working in
partnership through a Haitian-led process to help the country build a
more promising future.
The U.S. strategy to help Haiti become a more democratic and
prosperous neighbor involves both near term and longer term goals. The
most pressing task facing Haiti is, of course, the holding of
successful and peaceful parliamentary, local government, and
Presidential elections. The United States strongly recognizes the
importance of all Haitians being able to go to the polls to participate
in representative governance through a credible and transparent
electoral process. I know that Congress shares this goal, and your
consistent underscoring of the importance of Haitians freely expressing
their preferences at the ballot box has been invaluable in moving Haiti
forward toward elections.
The United States commends Haitian President Michel Martelly and
the members of Haiti's independent Provisional Electoral Council (CEP)
for their efforts to prioritize the holding of elections this year. I
would emphasize that the United States has no vote in these elections
and does not support any candidate or group of candidates. Simply put,
we support the democratic process. We are pleased that an electoral
decree and calendar have been published, and we are committed to
working with the Government of Haiti and our international partners to
coordinate appropriate assistance--including the deployment of
international observers--to help ensure that elections are inclusive,
transparent and credible. As electoral planning continues, the United
States supports the CEP, the United Nations, the OAS, and the
Government of Haiti (including its national police) in their efforts to
coordinate, support, and execute successful 2015 elections. We are
encouraging all actors to participate fully in the electoral process,
to abide by the rule of law, and to pledge to a high standard of
transparency.
Successful elections are the highest priority of our near term
engagement with Haiti. The citizens of Haiti choosing their leaders and
representatives through fair, democratic means feeds into and
reinforces our broader, longer term goal of fostering good governance,
which in turn is essential for building capacity. There are no quick
fixes or shortcuts; the process requires a long-term commitment on our
part. And, while the commitment of the United States is steadfast,
Haiti's success will, ultimately, depend on the actions of the Haitian
people. We can advise and assist, but Haiti's development must reflect
goals and priorities that the government and people of Haiti have
identified, and for which they are exercising ownership. In
coordination with other donors, the United States is working to equip
key Haitian institutions with the skills necessary to manage resources,
both financial and human, and to plan and execute projects. The
confidence of the Haitian people in their government will in large part
depend on its effectiveness in delivering basic services.
That said, sustained capacity-building and effective governance
require funds. Regardless of our efforts in other areas, without a
healthy economy, Haiti will remain poor and dependent. It is
indisputable that no long-term development goals in Haiti can be
sustainable without the growth of the private sector. Therefore,
helping Haiti strengthen, expand, and diversify its economy is a key
element of our strategy. Haiti has seen positive economic growth since
the earthquake, but more needs to be done. Unfortunately, political
gridlock has hindered progress. The impasse between Haiti's executive
and legislative branches has stymied the passage of legislation in such
important areas as an updated business code, an updated criminal code,
clarification of property rights, and the provision of electronic
signatures. Advances in these areas would strengthen investor
confidence in the Government of Haiti's pledge that ``Haiti is open for
business.''
Thanks to consistent, broad, bipartisan support in Congress, U.S.
Government assistance to Haiti has been substantial. Since the
earthquake, $4.1 billion has been made available in immediate
humanitarian assistance following the earthquake and for long-term
reconstruction. Of the $4.1 billion made available, 80 percent--$1.3
billion for humanitarian relief and $2.0 billion for reconstruction and
development has been disbursed. Since 2010, U.S. post-earthquake
assistance to Haiti has helped to measurably improve key economic and
social indicators and build infrastructure necessary for self-
sustaining growth.
In response to Haiti's desire for investments that support economic
growth outside of Port-au-Prince, the United States has targeted some
of its most significant assistance to one of Haiti's poorest regions in
the North. The Caracol Industrial Park (CIP) is a public-private
partnership that is funded by the Inter-American Development Bank and
is owned by the Government of Haiti. The U.S. Government contribution
consists primarily of support for building a modern power plant that is
now providing reliable electricity to the CIP as well as more than
7,000 local businesses and households in the community. Caracol was
conceived as a long-term public-private investment in Haiti's north and
will require time and continued support to reach its full potential. As
of July 2015, in just 3 years of operation, approximately 7,500 jobs
have been created at the Caracol Industrial Park. More jobs are
expected as facilities expand. Anchor tenant Sae-A is projected to
eventually create 20,000 jobs, and the Haitian owned Coles Group has
announced it will create 2,500 jobs at Caracol once further phases of
construction are completed. Apparel accounts for over 90 percent of
U.S. imports from Haiti. Thanks to the preferences accorded under the
HELP and HOPE Acts, apparel imports from Haiti are up, increasing by
over 6 percent in 2014 to a total of $854 million. Also promising is
the growth of value-added apparel exports which increased by 43 percent
in 2014, signaling a movement toward more complex products that could
yield higher wages for Haitian employees. This growth would not have
been possible without congressional action on the HELP and HOPE Acts.
The United States has also helped Haiti increase agricultural
productivity by introducing improved seeds, fertilizer, and
technologies to more than 70,000 farmers, which have helped increase
yields for rice, corn, bean, and plantain crops as well as increase
mango exports by 175 percent. Our funding has placed over 33,000
hectares of hillside farmland under improved watershed management. We
have supported an innovative business-plan competition that provides
matching grants of up to $200,000 to small- and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs) investing their own capital to expand their
businesses. So far, 60 businesses have received technical assistance,
of which 31 were awarded grants, leveraging over $10 million in private
capital for a total investment of over $15 million. Through our
assistance programs we have extended Development Credit Authority
guarantees of up to $57 million in loans by local commercial banks,
microfinance institutions, and credit unions. Working through the U.S.
Agency for International Development (USAID), the U.S. Government has
also partnered with the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to
bring $26 million of long-term financing and technical assistance to
Haiti for housing finance, as well as working capital loans to SMEs.
Additionally, the U.S. Treasury Department is providing technical
assistance to the Ministry of Finance to improve budgeting, tax
collection, and cash and debt management.
The United States has also increased agricultural productivity in
Haiti by supporting more than 300 farmer associations comprising more
than 70,000 farmers. This has led to increased crop yields and gross
profit margins for maize, beans, rice and plantains by a minimum of
five times, and has increased mango exports by 250 percent. Our funding
has placed over 33,000 hectares of hillside farmland under improved
watershed management. We have supported an innovative business plan
competition that provides matching grants of up to $200,000 to small-
and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) investing their own capital to
expand their businesses. So far, 60 businesses have received technical
assistance, of which 32 were selected to receive over $5 million in
matching funds to expand operations; those firms have invested an
additional $10 million of their own funds. Through our assistance
programs we have extended Development Credit Authority guarantees of up
to $57 million in loans by local commercial banks, microfinance
institutions, and credit unions. Working through the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID), the U.S. Government has also
partnered with the Overseas Private Investment Corporation to bring $26
million of long-term financing and technical assistance to Haiti for
housing finance, as well as working capital loans to SMEs.
Additionally, the U.S. Treasury Department is providing technical
assistance to the Ministry of Finance to improve budgeting, tax
collection, and cash and debt management.
The United States is also working to help improve justice and
security for Haitians. Since the earthquake our assistance has made
possible the training and commissioning of 3,300 new officers in the
Haitian National Police (HNP). The capacity and professionalism of the
HNP is increasingly important as the U.N. Stabilization Mission in
Haiti (MINUSTAH) draws down. The HNP's performance has indeed vastly
improved, most notably in antikidnapping investigations and crowd
control capacities. We have helped create a new HNP community policing
unit, which has grown to over 80 officers, in partnership with the New
York City Police Department and MINUSTAH. Using approximately $54M in
FY10 Supplemental funds, the USG completed construction of six
commissariats, barracks at the Presidential palace, and a pier;
construction of three prisons, a range of facilities for the
counternarcotics police (BLTS), and improvements at the HNP School are
all underway. Our programs have trained and equipped the BLTS,
increasing its size from about 40 to almost 200 officers and adding a
19-dog K-9 unit. The Miami-Dade Police Department trained 74
counternarcotics officers to help ensure sustainability of our
counternarcotics efforts. Funding from the U.S. Government has
supported the training of 2,392 judicial actors and helped reconstruct
more than 32,000 judicial case files following earthquake loss or
damage. Much work remains, especially in the judicial and corrections
sectors, but with U.S. assistance the Government of Haiti is
increasingly providing improved security for its people.
A positive sign is that the number of Haitians attempting to leave
Haiti for the United States is down. To help deter dangerous and
illegal sea migration and address a localized surge in human smuggling
in the waters off of Puerto Rico, the United States resumed in October
2014 the expedited removal of newly arrived Haitian migrants illegally
present on U.S. islands in the Mona Passage or on Puerto Rico. At the
same time, the United States established a safe, lawful alternative to
migrant voyages through the Haitian Family Reunification Parole (HFRP)
program, which allows eligible Haitian beneficiaries of family-based
immigrant visa petitions to come to the United States and join their
families before their immigrant visa priority dates become current. The
resumption of expedited removal operations in the Mona Passage and the
opportunities provided through the HFRP program have led to a marked
decrease in illegal sea migrant activity, with U.S. Coast Guard migrant
interdiction statistics showing a decrease in the number of Haitians
attempting to enter the United States illegally by boat in the first
quarter of FY 2015 compared to the same period in FY 2014.
One aspect of Haitian security involves the situation along its
border with the Dominican Republic. We are deeply concerned by the
reports from the Dominican Republic that tens of thousands of people,
mostly Haitians and people of Haitian descent, have crossed the border
from the Dominican Republic into Haiti since June 17. We are monitoring
the situation closely and actively engaging with the Government of the
Dominican Republic, the Government of Haiti, the United Nations High
Commissioner for Refugees, the International Organization for
Migration, civil society organizations, and the international community
to confirm that the appropriate authorities work to ensure the security
and welfare of all who cross the border and the protection of their
human rights. The United States is also funding civil society
organizations and international organizations, including the
International Organization for Migration (IOM), to assist with these
efforts. We continue to encourage the Governments of the Dominican
Republic and Haiti to consult and collaborate with each other and with
civil society groups and international organizations to develop and
duly implement processes that uphold the rule of law, provide
procedural safeguards, and are consistent with each country's
international obligations and commitments. If confirmed by the Senate,
I will do my utmost on this priority issue.
Development work in Haiti has never been easy and we are committed
to active monitoring and evaluation of all our assistance activities to
maximize their impact in support of our strategy. There are projects on
which we have not attained the results initially expected and we have
made adjustments accordingly. The three main areas where we have made
mid-course corrections have involved new housing construction, a new
port facility, and providing more assistance directly to Haitian
organizations. Building permanent new homes proved more costly and time
consuming than projected. This led to a shift in the permanent housing
strategy, to emphasize private-sector housing finance opportunities for
low-income Haitians, neighborhood upgrades, and support to help
Haitians transition temporary facilities into safe permanent
communities. Regarding a new port in the Fort Liberte area in Haiti's
north, there is not sufficient interest at this time from the private
sector to support construction. Therefore, the Government of Haiti
agreed that a more effective strategy would be to modernize and upgrade
existing port facilities at nearby Cap Haitien. We agreed, and this
project is currently underway. Finally, in the immediate aftermath of
the earthquake, which crippled many local Haitian NGOs, the U.S.
Government used international NGOs to initiate emergency relief
efforts. They had the advantage of being immediately operational and
they had vast experience expediting the provision of food, shelter, and
security in an unstable environment. Now that Haiti has transitioned to
long-term reconstruction and development, U.S. investments support a
more sustainable development approach that includes building the
capacity of local organizations. Today, the U.S. Government is helping
local organizations develop their administrative and financial
capacities--in particular accounting, reporting, and audit preparation
functions--so that they can better compete to be direct recipients of
U.S. funding. I attach great importance to our new approach to increase
direct support to Haitian organizations.
We have tried to learn from our course corrections. Despite having
fallen short of our original objectives in some cases, we can credit
U.S. assistance for genuine positive developments in Haiti. Our funding
helped house more than 328,000 earthquake-displaced Haitians by
providing transitional shelters, repairs to damaged homes, support to
host families, and rental vouchers. Almost 95 percent of displaced
persons have left the tent camps, which are all but gone. We have
funded the removal of 2.7 million cubic meters of earthquake rubble--36
percent of the estimated 7.4 million cubic meters of total rubble
removed. Our support for Haiti's infrastructure includes the
reconstruction of Haiti's University Hospital and other damaged health
facilities, and the construction of seven police stations and the
Presidential security unit barracks. Nearly half of all Haitians have
access to basic health services at U.S.-supported health facilities,
and we have provided $95 million for cholera treatment and prevention,
including clean water and sanitation activities. This has led to
improved basic health indicators and a dramatic decrease in the
incidence of cholera. Primary school enrollment is up, with the United
States funding the construction of more than 600 semipermanent
furnished classrooms, enabling over 60,000 children to return to
school. We have helped more than 100,000 businesses and households
convert cook stoves from charcoal to clean liquefied natural gas, and
supported the planting of 5 million tree seedlings.
Welcome as these improvements are, more needs to be done--
particularly in the area of effective governance. Haiti's leaders must
foster a political, societal, and economic environment conducive to
economic development and prosperity. Sustained development will not be
possible without responsive, accountable, and transparent governance;
without just application of the rule of law and respect for human
rights; without new laws and changes in existing ones to attract
investment; and without a fully staffed and functioning government in
every branch.
In analyzing Haiti's prospects for building a better future, and
how the United States can help, we must look realistically at the
challenges that country faces, but also not lose sight of factors
working in its favor. One of the most important of these is the
widespread support Haiti enjoys among the American public in general
and here on Capitol Hill in particular. Support from Congress was
swift, tangible, and significant, totaling $4 billion in post-
earthquake assistance appropriated. No less important has been your
sustained attention to that country, particularly at times when steps
in democratic progress have needed encouragement. If confirmed as
Ambassador to Haiti, I look forward to working with you in addressing
our shared goal of helping Haiti move forward, and I would encourage
you to visit.
As valuable as American support is, the greatest of Haiti's assets,
its ace in the hole, is its people. Although by some economic indices
Haiti ranks as the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere, in human
capital it is rich. Haitians have demonstrated dynamism, resilience,
creativity, and courage on a scale far beyond the country's modest
size. We seek to help Haitians create the conditions--political,
economic, and social--in which these talents can be put to best use.
Much remains to be done in Haiti, and I would not wish to
understate the scope of the task or the need for a long-term commitment
in order to achieve lasting progress. But the past 5 years have also
been marked by measurable improvements in the lives of Haitians and
genuine accomplishments in Haiti's recovery and development. Americans
can take satisfaction in helping Haitians help themselves. If confirmed
by the Senate, I will do my utmost to focus on a realistic and
achievable agenda to help make the U.S.-Haitian partnership stronger
than ever.
Senator Rubio. I await the arrival of my colleagues, so I
will just keep going for a little while.
I wanted to return to Mexico for a moment, Ms. Jacobson.
For a lot of Americans, there has been a lot of discussion the
past few weeks and months about the state of affairs in Mexico.
I think Mexico has a lot to be optimistic about.
One of the things that people are concerned about, I,
certainly, have been, watching both from this committee and
from the Intelligence Committee, is the notion that there are
regions in the northern part of Mexico that are not fully in
the control of their government. In essence that criminal
groups have de facto control these areas and, in particular,
one of the groups that is controlled by this horrific
individual who was able to escape in the last few days and
poses a threat to the United States and to his own people.
I would just take an aside to say I have seen some chatter
over the last few days that I think clearly understates who it
is that we are dealing with here in this individual, El Chapo.
He is a murderer, a person who is involved in virtually every
nefarious activity one can imagine, including kidnapping,
murders, and crimes committed within the United States
facilitated by his organization.
How would you describe the challenges the Mexican
Government faces in terms of providing security and stability,
particularly in those areas where perhaps they do not have
effective control over their territory as they would desire to
have?
Ms. Jacobson. I think, Mr. Chairman, in the first place, I
think I would want to associate myself entirely with your
characterization of El Chapo Guzman. To minimize his role or
the horror of what he has wrought with the Sinaloa cartel I
think would do a disservice to his victims and to people who
have been touched by the trafficking and the violence that the
group has wrought.
Clearly, the Government and the people of Mexico face a
very complicated and a very difficult security situation. It is
much more difficult in about a half-dozen states in the country
than elsewhere. It is not nationwide. That is where the
majority of the homicides take place, the majority of the drug
violence, the majority of the territorial control between and
among cartels.
It is important to remember, I think, that during the
congressional and gubernatorial elections that took place a
little over a month ago, I guess, just about a month ago, 99
percent of polling stations opened and operated normally around
the country, even in some of those places that have had high
levels of violence. So they were able to undertake the
elections and people were able to vote freely even in places
where you had rumors that they would not be able to exercise
their vote.
So I think that the notion that they have lost control of
their territory, while clearly they are under siege in some
places and there are places where people are fearful of local
authorities, and local authorities themselves are part of the
problem, not part of the solution, I think that there are a
number of places where it has been turned around, where the
Mexican Government at the local, state, and federal level have
been able to gain back the control.
That is what the Mexican Government continues to work on
and we in support of them, places like Ciudad Juarez in
Chihuahua, which for a time was really a no-go area and really
has been coming back with levels of violence that have dropped.
My colleague here served in Juarez during a very difficult
time as a great leader in our consulate.
So I do think that to continue to work on the institutions
of government to make sure that they are transparent, on
anticorruption mechanisms as the Mexican congress has just
passed, is critical to getting a handle on the full gamut of
security problems they face.
Senator Rubio. Another issue that, of course, is well
documented in the United States is the migratory issues that we
face across the border. Perhaps what many people are not as
aware of over the last few years is the trend now of a growing
number of people who are crossing the U.S. southern border, the
Mexican northern border, are not from Mexico. In particular, we
have seen a large upsurge of people migrating from the Northern
Triangle countries, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras.
First of all, what is the approach of the Mexican
Government, at this stage, to the reality that you know people
pushing up through the country from their southern border? And
where are the opportunities to work cooperatively with them on
both sides of the border to seal off the opportunities to
transit illegally, which, in fact, is a magnet for more people
to attempt to do it?
Ms. Jacobson. Absolutely. I think it is a very important
question, Senator.
You know, I think last year's surge in migrants from
Central America was an important kind of bellwether not just
for the United States in how we are focused on Central America
and the root causes of such migration, but also for Mexico,
which has seen migrants move through its territory for a long
time, but not in those kinds of numbers.
In the last year, the numbers coming into the United States
have dropped dramatically, but a big part of that has been the
Mexican effort to reduce the number of people coming into
Mexico at their southern border and to also reduce some of the
most dangerous practices that are being affected on migrants,
such as riding on the infamous train north, La Bestia, and
shutting that down so that migrants cannot be exploited
violently on that trip north, including unaccompanied minors.
So we have worked very closely with Mexico on this,
including on their southern border strategy, devoting
resources, training so that they can help both gain control
over their southern border with Guatemala with new task forces
working with the Northern Triangle countries, and then
obviously working with Mexico but also with the Northern
Triangle countries on the root causes that are causing the
migrants to flee in the first place.
Senator Rubio. Okay, thank you.
Senator Flake.
Senator Flake. Thank you. I wanted to be here earlier, but
votes intervened.
Senator Rubio. I am going to go now.
Senator Flake [presiding]. Okay, now let us get back to
Cuba policy. [Laughter.]
Senator Flake. Just joking.
Ms. Jacobson, we are very excited, at least I am,
certainly, in Arizona to have you headed to Mexico, hopefully,
if you are successful in your nomination.
I am sure you talked about some of the border issues. You
were talking about some of them when we came in. But what is
often overlooked is the tremendous amount of trade that goes
on. Mexico is a huge trading partner with the United States and
obviously of huge importance to the State of Arizona.
We obviously need border security, better border security
than we have. We also need to make sure that we have the
infrastructure, not just green uniforms at the border, but blue
uniforms as well to facilitate trade.
Can you talk about the importance of that?
Ms. Jacobson. Absolutely, Senator. Thank you.
I think that what we call the 21st century border strategy
that we are working on is so critical to the United States'
competitiveness, to North American competitiveness. We know
already that many, many goods that we manufacture cross the
border many times in that process. We know that $1.5 billion a
day in trade crosses the border between the U.S. and Mexico.
But we know that right now our infrastructure is not 21st-
century, and we need to get that better. But there are huge
improvements being made, whether it is at Nogales, where so
much of the winter fruits and vegetables come through to the
United States, new crossings that are being opened, the first
rail crossing in 100 years.
With our Mexican partners, this is a critical part of our
economic strategy for competitiveness of both countries.
We also know that of imports of finished products from
Mexico, 40 percent of the inputs to those products are from the
United States. The comparable figure from China is 4 percent.
So it is good for American jobs to continue working with Mexico
in that partnership.
And frankly, security and legitimate trade are not zero-
sum. They have to be pursued in tandem along the border. It is
the seam that knits us together. And it is critical for the
communities, as you know, all along that border.
Senator Flake. Right. You mentioned the improvement in
infrastructure. On the Arizona side, certainly the Mariposa
port, the international border there at Nogales is important,
and we have invested quite heavily. There are also commitments
on the part of the Mexican Government to undertake certain
infrastructure improvements.
How can you help in terms of advocacy to help them comply
with their obligations there?
Ms. Jacobson. I think that is really important. As you
know, the Mexican model is a little bit different from ours.
There are often concessions. And we have worked very closely
with the Mexican Government to try and make sure that to a much
greater extent their own planning and our planning match up, so
that you do not have cases where either our side is finished
before theirs or vice versa. And I would continue, if
confirmed, to advocate very strongly to ensure that our
planning is done so that we can make sure that their side
finishes up as quickly as ours or vice versa, in some cases.
There are now master plans along the border, in most cases,
Texas, Arizona, California. Making sure that we coordinate
those things across the border is just critical.
You know that the Arizona-Sonora coordination is critical
at the State level, and I would do everything I could from the
Federal side and the Embassy leadership side, to push the
Mexican Government and through them the concessionaire to make
sure that we get things moving in sync at all times.
Senator Flake. Great. That will, certainly, be helpful.
There is a lot of cooperation that goes on in terms of safety
inspections and whatnot. If there is good cooperation on the
Mexican side of the border, we can smooth and make this a lot
easier.
Ms. Jacobson. And, as you know, preinspection is coming to
cargo, and that is very exciting to reduce wait times at the
border for products.
Senator Flake. We are very excited about that.
Anyway, thank you, all. Because we have votes going on, and
I know that Senator Menendez needs to get back as well, I will
turn it over to him. But like I said, we are very excited.
For the rest of you all, I will let the other answers
stand.
But, Ms. Jacobson, I have been thrilled to work with you in
the past and look forward to working with you in the future.
Thank you.
Senator Menendez.
Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Congratulations to you all for your nominations and your
willingness to serve our country.
Ms. Jacobson, let me ask you, we are all incredibly, deeply
troubled by Joaquin Guzman's escape over the weekend, and I am
particularly disturbed by the fact that Guzman was arrested in
February 2014, and from all indications available, the U.S. did
not request his extradition until February of this year.
Can you explain why the State Department did not request
Guzman's extradition for a year, especially when he is facing
charges in at least seven U.S. Federal district courts? He has
long served as the overlord of what is considered the most
powerful drug cartel on the planet. What happened here?
Ms. Jacobson. Senator, what I can say, because we do not
get into the details, and I cannot since I am not a Department
of Justice employee, which basically prepares all of the
extradition packages with lawyers at the State Department, what
I can tell you is that we always want to extradite or seek
extradition of all of those who are detained overseas against
whom there are charges in the United States.
We have been discussing extraditions and the pace of
extraditions and our desire for greater extraditions with
Mexico for a number of years now. But what I cannot tell you is
the exact reasons or timing for the particular possible or
actual extradition requests.
Senator Menendez. So are you telling me that the State
Department's only role in extraditions, whether it be this or
any other one, is to act upon the Justice Department's
instigation?
Ms. Jacobson. No. There are, certainly, lawyers within the
State Department who work with the Justice Department, but it
is the Justice Department that puts together, with the State
Department, the extradition requests of other governments.
Senator Menendez. So it is the Justice Department that
delayed it?
Ms. Jacobson. I cannot tell exactly what the delay was. I
have to refer----
Senator Menendez. Someone is going to have to tell the
United States Senate why it took a year before we even asked
for his extradition, when this man is sought in seven Federal
districts, has a whole host of charges, one of the most
dangerous people in the Western Hemisphere, and we know the
risk of him breaking out of a Mexican jail is high.
Ms. Jacobson. I cannot confirm the exact time when the
request was made, Senator, except to refer you to the Justice
Department.
Senator Menendez. Okay, let me ask you this. Continuing on
the line of extraditions, here is something hopefully you can
help me with, Joanne Chesimard. You have been negotiating on
the Cuba reengagement. I see nothing on Joanne Chesimard. I see
nothing on others, such as the killer of the New Mexico state
trooper. She is on the FBI's 10 most wanted terrorists list.
So as our top diplomat right now for Latin America and the
Caribbean, can you explain the lack of progress for efforts at
extraditions, whether it be El Chapo or whether it be Joanne
Chesimard or the killer of the New Mexico state trooper?
Is this not a national security imperative for the State
Department?
Ms. Jacobson. Extraditions are an incredibly important tool
to fighting crime and getting back people who are high
priorities for the United States. We have had significant
numbers of extraditions from Mexico in the past and, as you
know, from many other countries in the hemisphere, including
Colombian and others. We have also had expulsions from Cuba
since 2010 of those that we wanted back in the United States
for crimes.
As I said before, Joanne Chesimard's case, in particular,
and I am from New Jersey and I know the case well, is raised
every time we talk to the Cubans. It has been raised at
extremely high levels with the Cuban Government. There has not
been a satisfactory response yet, and we will continue to raise
it in the law enforcement talks that we will now be having.
Senator Menendez. Well, I understand the Cubans are going
to talk to you about it. They will talk to you about it ad
infinitum because they say she has political refugee status in
their country, and, therefore, that is not really a bargaining
chip.
I just do not understand how we turn over three convicted
spies and cannot get one convicted cop killer back from Cuba.
Let me ask you, continuing on the national security threat
issues, I have seen that Diosdado Cabello, the head of
Venezuela's national assembly, is the target of a series of
investigations by U.S. Federal prosecutors and the Drug
Enforcement Agency. Putting aside recent meetings by the State
Department and pictures with Cabello, I am concerned that the
investigations are bringing into greater focus how the drug
trade is penetrating the highest levels of the Venezuelan
state.
So is the current situation in Venezuela a national
security threat to the United States?
Ms. Jacobson. I think that the current situation in
Venezuela is of great concern to the United States. Whether it
is a national security threat to the United States, I would not
say. We have made clear, as we did in the sanctions----
Senator Menendez. You would say it is not a national
security threat?
Ms. Jacobson. I would say it is a national security threat
in the sense that drug trafficking is overall a national
security threat to the United States. As we have said in our
reports annually, the Government of Venezuela is not
cooperating with us on that issue.
Senator Menendez. Okay, so what has changed from your
testimony on May 8 of last year when I asked you a very similar
question and your answer to me was, ``I think the answer to
that question is that it is a very serious concern to us, a
national security threat.''
Ms. Jacobson. Well, as I just said, I think drug
trafficking overall is a national security threat to the United
States.
Senator Menendez. I was not asking about drug trafficking
overall in that question, nor in this question. I was asking
you about Venezuela.
You told me on May 8 of 2014 that it was a national
security threat. Why is it less so today?
Ms. Jacobson. Whether the words are exactly the same this
day or then, I think the concerns that we have about Venezuela
and about drug trafficking are the same. We have concerns about
how much drugs may be coming through or out of Venezuela into
the United States, and we are going to continue to act to keep
them from coming in.
Senator Menendez. I think even the President in his
determination cites a national security threat.
One last question, when I have individuals who are brought
before the committee for the advice and consent of the Senate,
I take it very seriously. And one of the elements that I take
very seriously is that I am going to get fair, honest,
transparent answers to my questions so that I can make
judgments on the issues that I am called upon as a United
States Senator and as a senior member of this committee to make
judgments on.
When in a hearing on Venezuela, the same hearing where you
told me it was national security threat, I asked you whether or
not the opposition in Venezuela, as you had stated, was
actually opposed to us pursuing sanctions, and your answer to
me at that time was that the opposition elements engaged in the
current dialogue have suggested we refrain from sanctions
against individuals guilty of human rights violations.
Now that was not the case, and you ultimately made it very
difficult for me at a moment that I was trying to understand
what would be the consequences of sanctions. I thought that the
sanctions that the President ultimately signed were the right
ones, but you created a doubt in me, a doubt that should not
have been there because then I heard a chorus from the
opposition in Venezuela who said, no, we never said that.
So if I am going to look to advise and consent and vote
affirmatively for someone, I need honest and open and
transparent answers. And I do not feel that I got that from you
at that time.
So can you explain to me why I should feel that if I were
to vote for you to be the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico, a country
with which we have a critical relationship on a whole host of
issues, that I would feel that I was getting open and
transparent answers?
Ms. Jacobson. Senator, I guess one of the things I would
say is I would look to the response of the opposition after
these sanctions were passed when they publicly rejected those
sanctions. And I would suggest that there were different
answers from different members of the opposition, and they were
in an extremely difficult situation. And what I told you was
what I had heard from some of them.
But after it was said publicly, it put them in an extremely
difficult position, which I had not intended to put them in.
But it was never a misstatement to you of what I had heard.
Senator Menendez. Well, you asked to clarify the record,
and even your clarification then is not what you are telling me
now. When you asked to clarify the record, which I allowed you
to do when I was then the chairman, you said I would like to
clarify one point I made during the hearing, the opposition
elements engaged in the current dialogue have not specifically
suggested we refrain from sanctions against individuals guilty
of human rights violations.
Ms. Jacobson. Because those in the dialogue had not. It was
others who were outside the dialogue. And that was why I did
not want to cause problems for those who were within the
dialogue.
Senator Menendez. But you did not even, in your
clarification, give me that statement that you gave me now.
So I have a real problem in one of the most important
assignments in the Western Hemisphere, other than the one that
you presently possess, about whether I am going to get open,
honest, and transparent answers. That is a problem for me.
Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Menendez.
I think Senator Rubio is on his way back and we have to go
vote as well. We will go for a minute.
Mr. Mulrean, Haiti, how are we doing in terms of recovery
efforts? And how is the country, the government responding?
What do you see as your main challenge there?
Mr. Mulrean. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think what we see in the last year or two in Haiti is a
series of improvements in the general situation, particularly
if you look at the post-earthquake situation.
The health and economic indicators are up. The security
situation has improved. Private investment has outpaced donor
assistance for the last 3 years. And even some polling
indicates that Haitians feel that they are better off now than
they were preearthquake.
I think what this indicates, Senator, is that Haiti is
moving past the post-earthquake crisis relief and into a better
place, but a place that will still require long-term
development and support by the international community.
There are a lot of things that still need to be done. There
has been basically a political impasse between the executive
and the legislative branch, which has resulted in the need for
elections now coming up this fall.
The problem with this impasse is that it has prevented some
very important legislation from moving forward.
So the immediate concern, were I to be confirmed, Senator,
is the impending elections that will begin in August. In
October, you will have legislative, Presidential, and local
elections going on. I think for Haiti to move forward truly
into its development phase, you need to have an executive and
legislative branch that are willing to work together and take
some of the difficult decisions.
Senator Flake. What areas is USAID working in, in terms of
economic development?
Mr. Mulrean. Senator, Congress has been very generous post-
earthquake with Haiti. You have allocated $4.1 billion to
Haiti, 80 percent of which has been dispersed. All of the
humanitarian assistance is now completed. Where we are is the
focus is on the development and recovery assistance that is
focused on the economic, social, rule of law, and governance
areas.
I think it goes without saying that while things are better
in Haiti, economic growth has been in the 3 percent, 4 percent,
5 percent range, the last few years, to make a dent in Haiti in
the poverty and unemployment, it needs to be 7 percent or 8
percent. So what needs to really move forward well is economic
growth. There needs to be better investment.
Again, this goes back to a certain extent to the need for
political will to move forward. They need a new business code.
There are critical pieces of legislation on property rights
that need to move forward.
Senator Flake. Ms. Dogu, with Nicaragua, what are the main
areas of focus there for our development assistance?
Ms. Dogu. The main area of focus, Senator, will be
strengthening democratic institutions and rule of law in the
country. We are also going to be focusing on economic
integration with Central America as part of the Central
American strategy. We feel that it is very important that
Nicaragua integrates itself economically with its neighbors and
that all of Central America has a chance to compete together on
the global front.
In addition to that, of course, if I am confirmed, one of
my top priorities immediately upon arriving in the country
would be the safety and security of the people who work with me
there in the country, both the official Americans and their
families and the private citizens that are in the country. And
I would be focused on that immediately upon arrival, just to
make sure that we are prepared in case of any emergency.
Senator Flake. Thank you.
I have to run to vote, but let me just say, all four of you
are foreign career Foreign Service officers, and one of the
great parts of this job is to be able to meet with many. I
chair the Africa Subcommittee so I meet with almost all of the
career Foreign Service officers going to those countries. But I
am so impressed with the professionalism that I see and the
commitment to service that all of you exhibit. And I have not
had an occasion to work with three of you, but Ms. Jacobson I
have, and I have seen that professionalism. I have seen that
commitment.
And I just appreciate all that you do and for your service
and for your families as well. I know they sacrifice a lot to
have you in this position.
So thank you for your service, and I look forward to
continuing the process here.
Senator Rubio [presiding]. Thank you.
Unless more members come, we are going to reach a
conclusion here fairly soon, which I am sure none of you will
be offended if you are not the subject of a lengthy hearing.
But I did have some questions I wanted to touch base. Some are
a little bit broader.
I did want to revisit for a moment, Venezuela, Ms.
Jacobson. I cut short my questioning because I wanted to get to
all of the nominees.
I am not saying that this is something that I have been
told. I am just curious, and I think it is important for the
record. Are you aware of any assurances that Counselor Shannon
or any U.S. official made, including persons in the White House
or the NSC, to representatives of the Venezuelan Government
that the United States is going to refrain from applying
additional sanctions on human rights violators or corrupt
persons? Have any such assurances been made by anybody that you
are aware of in the U.S. Government?
Ms. Jacobson. Not to my knowledge, no.
Senator Rubio. Okay.
I want to get broader, and that may involve a number of the
countries involved, but particularly Nicaragua and Mexico. As
we look at the Western Hemisphere, there are two competing
camps that seem to have emerged, at least in my view, and I
would like to have your comment on it.
One is kind of the pro-American, I would say, but
friendlier to our interests, camp of nations, and you see
prosperity in these countries. Of course, Peru and Chile,
Colombia, Panama, and I would include Mexico in that group of
countries that are a key part of a kind of prosperous future
for the Western Hemisphere, all of which have made substantial
gains. They still have challenges. Colombia has significant
challenges. Mexico, we have talked about some of their
challenges as well.
And then there is the second group that has emerged and
they, on the other hand, are heading in the opposite direction,
in many respects. Obviously, Cuba for a long time but
Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, and oftentimes Nicaragua is in
that camp as well.
And so let me begin, and I do not want to make your job any
harder than it is going to be, if confirmed, but I do have
serious questions and I think many of us do about the
legitimacy of the elections that they have conducted there in
the past and the general attitude of the Nicaraguan Government
towards the United States of America. On the one hand, they do
allow U.S. investment of U.S. firms and companies. There is
travel there. There is engagement, in that sense. On the other,
their government is less than cooperative on a host of issues
and, in fact, they have now expressed a willingness, for
example, to allow the Russians to increase military cooperation
with them and even pay an increased number of port visits, et
cetera.
Ms. Dogu, how would you describe our relationship with
Nicaragua today? Obviously, they are not an ally in the
traditional sense of the word. But how would you describe our
current situation when it comes to their government versus the
United States, and the relationship between us at this moment?
Ms. Dogu. Mr. Chairman, I think you actually described it
quite well.
It is a very complex relationship. We do have some stresses
in the relationship, but we also do have areas where we are
able to cooperate quite well together.
On the stress side, obviously, we are concerned about some
of the things that you mentioned in terms of the lack of free
elections and the lack of space for people in the country to
have a dialogue about the choice that they would have for
leaders of the country.
On the economic side, however, we cooperate well. We are
their number one trading partner. They are part of the Central
American Free Trade Agreement. Since they joined the Central
American Free Trade Agreement and that went into effect, their
trade with the United States has increased by about 165
percent. Trade from the United States to Nicaragua has also
increased fairly significantly.
Interestingly, even on the law enforcement side and on the
counternarcotics side, we have been able to find an opportunity
to work together. On the counternarcotics side, we do have
cooperation with the Government of Nicaragua, small funding
that goes to them through the Department of Defense and through
DEA.
So we do have some areas of cooperation on the law
enforcement side. They have actually removed from their country
two fugitives that were on the FBI top 10 list last year in
2014.
So I think the challenge for me, if I am confirmed, sir,
will be to continue to find those areas where we can cooperate
together and to go ahead and work very carefully and closely to
address the areas of concern where we do not get along so well.
And I can commit to you that I will do that and it will be a
high priority for me, if confirmed.
Senator Rubio. And then, Ms. Jacobson, let me just first
ask you about the broader region. I described these sorts of
competing camps that have emerged.
Mexico I think is a key linchpin to that. In my
recollection, they are if not the largest among the largest
economies in the region, certainly in comparison to some of the
smaller countries. They have always also had a significant
influence in the multinational organizations that characterize
the region.
As Mexico continues to grow and prosper, do you view them
as a nation, as a government, willing to play more in the
regional leadership category? Are they prepared, for example,
to play a greater role in what is happening with human rights
violations and elections that are upcoming in Venezuela? Are
they prepared to address some of the challenges that are being
faced to their south, which they are impacted by, in the
Northern Triangle countries? How would you characterize their
willingness to become a more active participant as a regional
leader, which is really their role in that region, rightfully?
Ms. Jacobson. I think that is an incredibly important point
for Mexico. Mexico for many, many years had a very, very strong
role, especially on the economic side with Central America. I
think to some extent during Venezuela's heyday of high oil
prices in Petrocaribe, Mexico was pushed out of that sphere a
little bit.
They have reasserted their engagement on Central America.
They have reasserted it on economic issues in greater
engagement with the Central American countries.
They have reasserted it on energy, which is extremely
positive. There are gas pipelines being built between Mexico
and Guatemala. We know that energy prices in Central America
are as much as 10 times higher than they are in the United
States. This affects their productivity and all of the other
ills that we see reflected in migration.
So Mexico's greater engagement with Central America and its
leadership there is critical. But beyond that, I think they can
play more of a role. Mexico, as it opened up and began to be
more confident as a democracy opening up to U.N. human rights
organizations and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights
organization system, needs also to play that role regionally.
There are Mexican members of the Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights now, and it would be great if Mexico felt more
confident in playing that role regionally with South American
countries or elsewhere.
But I also think it is significant beyond regionally that
President Pena Nieto talked about Mexicans being involved in
peacekeeping for the first time when he was at the U.N. General
Assembly last fall. That is another place where I think Mexico
can begin to make a contribution in leadership, including in
the region.
Senator Rubio. The general state of affairs in Mexico,
obviously for years some have viewed Mexico as a source of
cheaper labor, as a place where businesses move operations
because it might be less costly to do business there, as a
source of migration to the United States in massive numbers.
But over the last few years, all those factors have begun to
change. In fact, there is an emerging middle class in Mexico
now with significant consumer power and there are significant
pockets of prosperity emerging within parts of Mexico as they
help continue to try to make this transition to a more
prosperous future.
How would you describe the state of affairs in Mexico
today? Is it a country headed in the right direction,
obviously, with significant challenges? Is it a country that
remains the way I just characterized it, that some view as a
place that--because, for example, as we have seen in some
reports, net migration from Mexico significantly declined.
Partially, I would imagine, due to the economic downturn in the
United States, but also partially if not primarily due to the
fact that now there are income and employment opportunities in
Mexico today that did not exist.
So what are the drivers of this growth? And what do they
need to do next to continue those trends?
Ms. Jacobson. I think there are a number of things. One, to
be honest, is out of their control. And that is demographics.
The Mexican population is aging to some extent, as the U.S.
population has. And we know that people do not migrate beyond a
certain age, in terms of illegal migration or undocumented
migration.
But the other is that the Mexican Government has been
extremely focused, as was the Calderon administration, on
education. And that is crucial to them sustaining the movement
of large numbers of people into that middle class.
And they know that as we work on education jointly--and we
have expanded our educational cooperation dramatically. Last
year, there were hundreds of Mexican teachers who came to the
United States for advanced English studies to go home and teach
English in Mexico. This is part of the President's 100,000
Strong in the Americas and a joint bilateral program with
Mexico that we have launched.
And I think we are looking at ways to improve the
educational exchanges but not just at the very high, top 4-year
level. Mexico has developed a series of ``politecnicos,'' which
are more akin to vocational training or community colleges, to
really educate and train the gap between those who go through
K-12 but are not necessarily going to go to a 4-year
university, but get involved in manufacturing jobs that now
require more than just a high school education in Mexico as
well.
And I think that is really the focus of Mexico, on
education moving forward, because I would agree with the first
characterization you gave of Mexico as an increasingly, I guess
it was the second one, an increasingly middle-class country
with really important pockets of progress that need to be
expanded to the rest of the country.
The economic and structural reforms that this
administration passed in Mexico in its first year in office are
really critical, but now they have to implement those reforms
and keep moving forward with education and with fiscal reforms
and telecommunications and energy openings to provide the kinds
of jobs that will continue the growth for both our economies.
Senator Rubio. You signaled demographic trends in Mexico,
and it is an interesting point. Their immigration policies are
much more stringent than ours. That is correct. In essence, it
is a lot easier to immigrate legally to the United States than
it is to immigrate legally to Mexico.
So the question then is, on the issue of migration, as they
continue to develop in this direction, is it your sense that
this is a country more willing, a government more willing, to
cooperate with the United States to stem the flow of illegal
migration across their northern border than they were 5 or 10
years ago?
There is a sense among some that I partially share that
because of the high level of remittances from the United States
back to Mexico that there has been interest in the past in not
discouraging migration as a source of remittances back to the
United States. But is there now a sense that for the first time
in a while, the Mexican Government is starting to realize
increasingly that the instability on their northern border is
attracting migration on their southern border and on their
coasts, and present security challenges to Mexico not just to
the United States? And if so, do you think now there is an
opportunity to work even closer with them to establish the
sorts of improvements we need on both sides of the border to
solidify that situation further?
Ms. Jacobson. What I can say, Mr. Chairman, is I think that
the Mexican Government does realize the threat to both the
economic situation and to the border, both northern and
southern, that undocumented or uncontrolled migration creates,
both from other people using Mexican territory to traverse to
come to the United States as well as Mexicans entering the
United States undocumented.
I think the cooperation has been really quite good in
recent years. But I will say that it has been amped up
recently, and there is a real sense in Mexico, I think, that as
others use their territory to try to get to the United States,
and their own economic situation improves, they could decide to
stay in Mexico. And so it is in their interest to work on
orderly and safe and legal migration with protections for
people, of course, the same way it is for us.
Senator Rubio. My final question, because we are nearing 5
o'clock, again, for you, Ms. Jacobson, because we may not see
you again in your current capacity before the committee, I know
you have been involved in the negotiations that ultimately have
led to the announcement of mutual embassies in Washington and
in Havana. Ironically, just a few days after that announcement
was made, I think the Sunday after the 5th of July, there were
once again mass detentions in Nevada. The Ladies in White,
there was one peaceful demonstrator who had his nose fractured,
and was beaten.
And it goes back to the situation about this Embassy. What
kind of Embassy are we going to have in Havana? I know that the
argument has been that we are going to have an Embassy in
Havana the way we do in other countries that have unfriendly
governments and that approach. But I do think we have now taken
this massive step, the President has, of diplomatically
recognizing that government as a legitimate form of government.
Although we, certainly, have qualms about how they operate, the
President has given them diplomatic recognition and opened this
Embassy.
What kind of Embassy is this going to be? It appears to me
from what has been announced that the employees of that
Embassy, other than the American diplomatic employees, the
people who clean, the people who do the service work, will
always continue to be hired from an agency controlled by the
Cuban Government. It is my understanding that there will
continue to be a significant security perimeter that could
discourage people from coming to the Embassy to appeal for
assistance from the United States. It appears that all but two
members, and maybe I am wrong about the number, but there will
be significant limitations on the ability of U.S. diplomats to
use the Embassy to travel throughout the country and engage
with people. And there apparently will be significant
limitations on the ability to deliver enhancements to the
technological capabilities of that facility.
So, in essence, other than the name on the door, what will
be different about this facility than the interests section
that we have there now?
Ms. Jacobson. Thank you, Senator.
It was very important, as we discussed this opening of
embassies and reestablishment of diplomatic relations, that we
be absolutely certain that we can do our jobs under the Vienna
Convention as we see them, which include being able to get out
into the country and talk to people, certainly more than just
two people but others within the Embassy, and that we ensure
that the Embassy is a place that people can come to, Cubans can
come to, because Americans have never really had great
difficulty if they are in Cuba.
And I can assure you that what we will be doing and the way
we will be operating is significantly different than we have
been operating as an interests section. The security presence
outside the interests section has already been reduced and the
agreement on that is a significant reduction in security
presence outside the future Embassy, such that we hope people
will not feel nearly the same kind of presence or threat, and
there will no longer be Cuban Government screening or names
taken for people to enter the U.S. Embassy. That will be
something, as we do all over the world, that we do, not the
host government.
The ability to travel is similar to our restrictions in
many other places around the world. There are a number of
people at the Embassy who will be--it is more than two, as a
matter of fact--who will be able to travel without any pre-
notification. But others will be able to travel on a certain
number of days' notification, but they will no longer have to
ask permission. That is quite significant, because we
previously had to ask for approval. Now it is only a
notification, and then we go.
So that is really quite significant in enabling us to get
out and travel.
We also have had almost no ability to get sensitive
shipments into our interests section. They had all but stopped.
We have made a very good start on reprovisioning the interests
section, and we will continue to have talks thereafter about
future shipments.
So in many of the ways, all of the ways that we laid out
that were important to us to begin to operate more like
everyplace else that is a restrictive environment, we made
enormous progress from where we are now.
Senator Rubio. Well, I want to thank all the nominees for
being here with us today. I appreciate it very much, and your
patience in the back-and-forth of people coming in and out.
Again, we look forward to continuing to review your
nominations.
You may receive written questions and follow-up from
members of the committee, and I encourage you to promptly
respond to those as quickly as possible, since a delay in that
response could delay a final vote in consideration by the
Senate.
So again, I want to thank all of you for your service to
our country and for your willingness to continue to serve. And
with that the committee stands adjourned.
I apologize, a reminder that the record will be open until
Friday at the end of the business day.
Thank you. The committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:54 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
----------
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
Responses of Roberta S. Jacobson, Nominated to be Ambassador to the
United Mexican States, to Questions from Members of the Committee
ambassador-designate jacobson's responses
to questions from senator corker
Question. Mexico has made significant progress integrating with
North American and global supply chains, generating economic
opportunities. Deepening and sustaining the benefit of these policies
and recent significant policy reforms will require the rule of law.
Where does Mexico stand in implementing its ambitious
judicial reform and how can you, as Ambassador, properly
support this key step forward for Mexico?
Answer. Mexico's 2008 constitutional mandate requires all levels of
government to transition from an inquisitorial to an accusatorial
justice system by June 2016. The new system will include open trials,
leading to greater transparency and efficiency, and decreasing the
reliance on confessions, which has been tied to human rights abuses. It
will also aim to prevent and punish impunity and abuses more
transparently and effectively.
Under the Merida Initiative, the U.S. Government is providing tens
of millions of dollars in assistance to support the transition of
Mexico's judicial system at the federal and state level. Moreover, as
the U.S. and Mexican economic relationship continues to mature the
protection of property rights, including intellectual property rights
(IPR), is critical for investment, growth and prosperity. We are our
pursuing these objectives through our initiatives under the High Level
Economic Dialogue.
If confirmed, I will do all I can to promote U.S. cooperation and
assistance to support the Government of Mexico's justice sector reform
efforts and the rule of law.
Question. Mexico has recently been helpful in deterring
undocumented migration from Central America, including unaccompanied
minors. Will this effort by Mexico to interdict and repatriate
undocumented migrants be sustainable over time?
Answer. Cooperation with Mexico on migration issues has been
excellent. In June 2014 and in January 2015, President Pena Nieto
expressed his commitment to President Obama to return children safely
to their families in Central America, build Central American capacity
to receive returned children, and address the underlying factors
driving migration. We believe Mexico's increased enforcement, including
against human smuggling, as well as its efforts to share best practices
on migration management with Central American governments have been
significant factors in reducing the number of migrants apprehended by
U.S. immigration officials at our southern border.
To help sustain Mexico's efforts, the United States is working with
the Mexican Government to disrupt the organized criminal networks
facilitating human smuggling, including through the provision of
training, technical assistance, equipment, and coordination in support
of Mexico's efforts to strengthen enforcement in its southern border
region.
__________
ambassador-designate jacobson's responses
to questions from senator menendez
Question. The TPP negotiations are in their final stages and many
have high expectations that weaknesses in Mexico's labor laws will be
addressed. Can the TPP really address the challenges to labor rights in
Mexico without amendments to Mexican laws? Should these changes take
place prior to the agreements' entry into force?
Answer. In order to meet the labor standards in TPP, each TPP
country will need to have laws and practices consistent with the
International Labor Organization's Declaration on Fundamental
Principles and Rights at Work, which includes freedom of association
and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining,
the elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor, the
effective abolition of child labor, and the elimination of employment
discrimination. TPP also includes requirements for countries to adopt
and maintain laws and practices on minimum wages, hours of work, and
occupational safety and health. On questions related to the
negotiations and TPP's entry into force, I would refer you to the
Office of the United States Trade Representative.
Question. Although the administration has indicated support for
strengthening the labor rights provisions of the NAFTA, U.S. support
for labor capacity-building programs in Mexico historically has been
inadequate relative to the situation. For example, USAID has only one
labor capacity-building program in Mexico, the Global Labor Program,
which is scheduled to end in January 2016. Both USAID and the
Department of State have so far been unwilling to use their trade
capacity building funds to increase support for labor capacity programs
with trade unions in Mexico.
If confirmed, how will you ensure that the United States
provides sufficient attention and funding for labor capacity-
building programs in Mexico, so that Mexico can fulfill the
labor rights commitments it has made in trade agreements with
the United States?
Answer. The administration is working to identify needs and ensure
that there will be appropriate labor capacity-building plans in place
for TPP partners to support their efforts to improve protection of
labor rights, particularly those related to the International Labor
Organization's Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at
Work.
As you note, some related work is already underway in Mexico.
USAID/Mexico is supporting a pilot project to reform Mexico's labor
arbitration courts through the Mexican Competitiveness Institute
(IMCO). USAID also provides capacity-building funding to the Solidarity
Center. The Solidarity Center programs in Mexico seek to strengthen the
independence and democratic structure of labor unions in key sectors of
the Mexican economy in strategic locations, with the overall goal of
improving their ability to democratically represent workers, address
issues of corruption and increase economic transparency and citizen
participation. If confirmed, I will continue to support such programs.
Question. Over the past year, the United States has struggled in
its response to the refugee crisis of unaccompanied children arriving
on the Southwestern border. In 2015, the number of unaccompanied
children arriving to the U.S. is down, but emerging evidence suggests
this has less to do with the response by the U.S. and Central American
governments, and more to do with Mexico's actions. While Mexico's
participation in addressing this refugee crisis is vital, increasingly
it appears that vulnerable children migrants detained in Mexico may not
be receiving screening for international protections that they deserve.
If confirmed as Ambassador, how would you work with the
Mexican Government to ensure that the flow of migrants through
the country is handled in a manner in which ensures the rights,
protections, screening and appropriate care of all individuals?
Answer. The U.S. Government engages regularly with Mexican
authorities on immigration issues, including border security,
repatriation, enforcement, and migration of unaccompanied children.
Recognizing the significant increase of Central American migrants,
particularly unaccompanied children, transiting Mexico en route to the
United States in 2014, the U.S. Government engaged with the Mexican
Government to develop better ways to cooperate on this important issue.
I am aware of reports expressing concern over the inadequate
protection of the human rights of migrants apprehended and repatriated
by Mexican authorities. We discuss these issues with our Mexican
counterparts on a regular basis. On February 25, 2015, the Department
convened the third meeting of the U.S.-Mexico Repatriation Strategy and
Policy Executive Coordination Team (RESPECT) to continue efforts to
align U.S. and Mexican resources and to ensure the safe and humane
treatment of migrants. If confirmed, I will continue to raise these
issues and concerns at the highest levels of the Mexican Government,
and work to identify ways the U.S. Government can best assist Mexican
authorities.
Question. How can the State Department and U.S. Embassy Mexico City
support advances in the Government of Mexico's search for the more than
20,000 people who have disappeared or gone missing over the past
decade, including the case of the 43 disappeared students in Iguala?
Answer. The issue of the missing and disappeared is a significant
human rights problem in Mexico, as we noted in our 2014 Human Rights
Report. A database of names is an essential tool in addressing this
challenge and, while Mexico's National Registry for Missing and
Disappeared Persons exists, it is incomplete and imperfect. President
Pena Nieto has pledged to support both a national missing persons
database and a national genetic information database.
I led the U.S. delegation to the Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue
(BHRD) last year, where my Mexican counterparts shared the challenges
they faced in collecting, verifying, and managing the registry.
We have provided significant expertise that can be brought to bear
here. Forensics and crime-scene investigation trainings, for example,
share many of the fundamentals that are required to collect the
evidence necessary to resolve cases.
Regarding Iguala, I have been following the tragic events involving
the disappearance, and presumed killing, of up to 46 students in the
state of Guerrero in September 2014. We have met with Mexican officials
to express our concerns and offer assistance to resolve this case. My
thoughts and sympathies remain with the families and friends affected
by the loss of loved ones. This horrific crime requires a full,
transparent investigation and the prosecution of all responsible.
Mexican authorities have undertaken such an investigation and
detained nearly 100 suspects. The Mexican Government has sought the
assistance of a group of independent experts under the auspices of the
Inter American Commission on Human Rights. We strongly support the
experts group, whose mandate includes making recommendations to the
Mexican Government about reforms that will help prevent disappearances.
The problem of disappearances underscores the importance of our
partnership under the Merida Initiative: supporting Mexican efforts to
enhance the professional capacity of the Mexico's justice sector
institutions, thus ensuring accountability and increasing public trust.
We value our collaborative law enforcement relationship with Mexico
and, if confirmed, I will make our cooperation on advancing the rule of
law in Mexico among my highest priorities.
Question. The Government of Mexico has informed media outlets that
it did not receive a formal, completed extradition request for Joaquin
Guzman until June 2015. Please describe why this request was not
submitted to the Mexican Government until nearly 16 months after
Guzman's arrest. What role did you play in the interagency process to
advocate for submitting a request for Guzman's extradition? What role
did you play in advocating that the Mexican Government respond
affirmatively to the U.S. request for extradition?
Answer. While the United States does not usually comment on pending
extradition requests before they become public judicial proceedings for
law enforcement and security reasons, it is the practice of the United
States to seek extradition whenever defendants subject to U.S. charges
are apprehended in another country.
Pursuant to the U.S.-Mexico Extradition Treaty, in advance of
submitting a full extradition request either country may seek from the
other a provisional arrest warrant for a fugitive. The treaty further
contemplates that, after the fugitive has been arrested, a full
extradition package will be submitted. We can confirm that, at the
request of the United States, Mexico issued such a provisional arrest
warrant for Joaquin ``Chapo'' Guzman Loera more than a decade ago and,
that subsequent to the arrest of Guzman Loera, the United States
submitted a full extradition request to Mexico. The Department of State
is part of the interagency review process for all extradition requests.
The U.S. Government has been clear since Guzman Loera's initial
arrest about its desire to hold him accountable for his crimes in the
United States. Even had the Mexican Government immediately agreed to
extradite Guzman to the United States following his February 2014
capture, in all likelihood, he still would have been in a Mexican
prison on July 11. He would have undoubtedly fought the extradition
request in the Mexican legal system, as is his right under Mexican law.
And the Mexican justice system would still have been preparing its
prosecution and trial, based on its stated intent to ensure he faced
justice in Mexico before the United States. Mexico's former attorney
general made very clear from the beginning of the Pena Nieto government
that Mexico wanted to prosecute Guzman in Mexico for crimes committed
against the Mexican people before considering any extradition request.
That is Mexico's sovereign right and permitted under our bilateral
extradition treaty.
__________
ambassador-designate jacobson's responses
to questions from senator rubio
Question #1. Assistant Secretary Jacobson, during your testimony to
the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in May of 2010, you spoke about
the administration's vision for a ``21st century border.'' You stated
that the objective of this new border would be to intercept threats
before they even reach the border.
Would you be able to describe further how that vision has
been achieved today?
If confirmed, what will be your comprehensive antidrug
strategy with Mexico?
Answer. We have made significant steps to modernize and strengthen
our shared border through both the Merida Initiative and our 21st
Century Border Management Initiative. Under the 21st Century Border
Management Initiative, the United States continues to work to reduce
border wait times by expanding infrastructure capacity, including
through public-private partnerships, and by improving the efficiency of
the inspection process. We saw the completion of the first phase of our
expansion at the busiest land port of entry between our two countries
in November 2014, the San Ysidro-El Chaparral border crossing between
San Diego and Tijuana, which more than doubled the number of inspection
booths and significantly reduced vehicle wait times from 3 hours to as
little as 30 minutes. Likewise, in October 2014 we inaugurated an
improved port of entry at Nogales, AZ, through which 40 percent of
Mexican produce bound for U.S. supermarkets passes. We are finalizing a
pilot program this year for cargo preinspection at three different
sites on our border, which will allow U.S. and Mexican customs agents
to work side by side to inspect and clear cargo simultaneously. This
will notably increase cargo inspection efficiency at the border.
The United States has expended more than $1.4 billion in equipment,
training, and capacity-building, including that dedicated to
modernizing and securing our shared border since the Merida Initiative
began in 2008. With support from Merida, Mexico has built a stronger
legal framework, augmented specialized security forces, improved the
detection of movement of narcotics, arms, and money, instilled a
growing culture of lawfulness, and is more effectively using law
enforcement information through the broader application of technology.
To improve border security, the United States has provided the
Government of Mexico with over $115 million in fixed and mobile
nonintrusive inspection equipment (NIIE), maintenance, and related
detection devices for use at Mexico's points of entry, border
crossings, and internal checkpoints. With Merida-funded equipment, the
Mexican Government has seized over $4 billion in narcotics and illegal
currency. Building upon the Government of Mexico's own investment in
NIIE and border security infrastructure, Merida assistance has
significantly bolstered the ability of Mexican officials to increase
border security and facilitate the flows of legitimate commerce and
travel, while reducing the movement of illicit narcotics, currency,
weapons, explosives, black market goods, and undocumented migrants.
During his visit to Mexico in May 2013, President Obama stood with
President Pena Nieto and reaffirmed our commitment ``to meet our
responsibilities--to reduce the demand for illegal drugs, and combat
the southbound flow of illegal guns and cash that help fuel violence.''
This is a fundamental component of our bilateral security cooperation:
our two countries have a shared responsibility to work together to
address this problem that affects both of our countries. The United
States is actively working to prevent the illicit flow of drug profits
and weapons that strengthen the drug cartels in Mexico and fuel the
violence. If confirmed, I will continue our efforts under the Merida
Initiative and in close coordination with law enforcement agencies to
combat criminal groups involved in the drug trade and the flow of
illegal drugs through Mexico.
Question #2. The United States, Mexico and Canada are all involved
in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations along with other
Pacific region countries.
To what extent might a failure to conclude a TPP impact
North American trade relations and industrial competitiveness?
Answer. The TPP will be the economic centerpiece of a growing,
dynamic Asia-Pacific region, which includes North America. This
agreement has the potential to boost economic growth, development, and
jobs in the United States, Mexico, and Canada and to enhance the
competitiveness of the North American economy. Conversely, without the
ratification of TPP, North America will not be as well positioned to
compete effectively within the Asia Pacific and with the other major
regions of the world.
We anticipate success in this endeavor as we are very close to
completing the negotiations. And with the passage of TPA, Congress has
given the administration marching orders to conclude a high-standard
agreement. We are working hard to achieve an agreement that will not
only support our economic and strategic interests, but also reflect our
values. As President Obama has said, we must ensure that as the
economic rules of the road are drawn up for this important region of
the world, the United States is playing a leading role in shaping them.
Question #3. In December 2008, Mexico and the United States began
the Merida Initiative to disrupt the capabilities of organized crime,
improve the capacity of the Mexican judicial system to administer the
rule of law, improve border security, and strengthen local communities
across Mexico.
What is the current status of implementation of Merida
Initiative programs in Mexico?
Following the implementation of Merida Initiative programs,
has Mexico increased its security cooperation with the U.S.,
remained the same, or decreased?
Has the U.S. successfully helped Mexico develop independent
judiciary/courts systems that is free from political
interference? (Why Not?)
Answer. The Merida Initiative has transformed our bilateral
relationship with Mexico. We have achieved unprecedented levels of
bilateral collaboration on a range of issues, including security,
economic competitiveness, trade, energy, environment, climate, human
rights, cultural and educational ties, and regional and global issues.
Since the Merida partnership was formalized in 2008, $2.3 billion
has been appropriated for the Merida Initiative (FY08-14). More than
$1.4 billion in equipment, training, and capacity-building has been
delivered since the Merida Initiative began. Between 2008 and 2014
Mexico invested about $68.3 billion in security and public safety. That
means that our assistance has leveraged approximately $28.5 dollars in
Mexican investment for every $1 dollar of our own appropriations.
The Merida Initiative is a broad strategy to support the Mexican
Government's efforts to strengthen rule of law, democratic
institutions, and community efforts against crime and violence, while
protecting human rights. The Merida Initiative enables greater
cooperation between U.S. and Mexican law enforcement agencies,
prosecutors, and judges as they share best practices and expand
bilateral cooperation in tracking criminals, drugs, arms, and money.
The Merida Initiative has contributed greatly to strengthening our
overall bilateral law enforcement cooperation.
Mexico's security challenges do not lend themselves to easy or
short-term solutions. Building institutional capacity for the rule of
law is crucial to long-term success. Our support for Mexico's ongoing
judicial reform will help create a more effective, transparent, and
independent justice system. Continuing our strong security cooperation
under the Merida Initiative remains a major component of our bilateral
relationship. If confirmed, I will continue our joint efforts to
support more capable institutions--especially police, justice systems,
and civil society organizations--as rule of law is essential to
Mexico's economic growth.
Question #4. There have been media reports suggesting that the
current Mexican administration does not prioritize information-sharing
as highly as previous Mexican administrations, including a prohibition
on direct intelligence-sharing between law enforcement groups. Under
President Nieto, all information must go through a centralized office
under Mexico's Secretary of the Interior.
Does Mexico regularly accept U.S. security and intelligence
assistance when offered?
Has a slowdown in criminal intelligence sharing hindered
law enforcement operations in both Mexico and the United
States?
Do you support a more robust role for the U.S. military in
Mexico to assist the Government of Mexico with training,
equipping, and targeting efforts in the fight against the
cartels and transnational criminal organizations?
What role can the U.S. military and law enforcement play in
helping Mexico secure their southern border with Guatemala and
Belize?
Answer. The United States and Mexico have an extremely close and
cooperative security, law enforcement, and intelligence relationship,
one that has expanded over the last 15 years and especially since the
inception of the Merida Initiative. We have a range of assistance we
can and have made available to the Government of Mexico, and Mexico
works closely with us to define the assistance that best responds to
the government's priorities and the situation on the ground.
While I would defer to our law enforcement agencies to comment on
changes in the pace of criminal intelligence-sharing with the Mexican
Government, I believe we have the mechanisms in place and the close
institutional and personal relationships for strong law enforcement
cooperation to more effectively address the transnational criminal
organizations (TCOs) that threaten both our countries.
I believe we have the right balance with respect to the role of the
U.S. military in assisting Mexico in confronting TCOs. The military-to-
military relationship has strengthened in the last few years.
Our military and law enforcement agencies will continue to play a
key role in support of Mexico's effort to implement its Southern Border
Strategy and better secure its borders with Belize and Guatemala. We
are already working with Mexican agencies to increase their
capabilities along their southern border as well as to encourage
greater cooperation and communication between Mexico and its southern
neighbors.
If confirmed as Ambassador, I will work to ensure the security, law
enforcement, and intelligence sectors of the United States work
together effectively with their Mexican counterparts to advance our
mutual security interests.
Question #5. Mexico's most notorious drug lord, Joaquin ``El
Chapo'' Guzman, broke out of a high-security prison on July 11 for the
second time, escaping in a tunnel built right under his cell. Recent
media reports suggest that the DEA had developed intelligence
suggesting that Guzman and his associates were plotting his escape as
early as 2014. Mexico's Secretary of the Interior, Osorio Chong, has
denied that authorities in Mexico were ever informed of potential
escapes while U.S. authorities contend that they alerted Mexican
authorities 16 months ago.
Was intelligence about a potential escape by Guzman ever
conveyed to the Mexican Government?
Why would Secretary of the Interior, Osorio Chong, claim
his office had no warning from the U.S. when his office is the
clearinghouse for law enforcement information-sharing?
Did the prohibition of direct intelligence-sharing between
law enforcement agencies in Mexico and the U.S. help lead to
Guzman's escape?
As Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere,
were you aware of any intelligence or any other information
suggesting Guzman was plotting his escape?
Did you ever personally discuss the Guzman case with any
Mexican official? If not, why not?
Answer. While I cannot comment on the sharing of specific law
enforcement information in the context of an ongoing sensitive
investigation, I can assure you I have stayed actively engaged on the
Guzman case. I and others in the Department and in Embassy Mexico City
have discussed the Guzman case with Mexican officials and underscored
the strong interest of the United States in seeking his extradition.
Mexico wanted to prosecute Guzman in Mexico for crimes committed
against the Mexican people before taking up consideration of any
extradition request, which is permitted under our bilateral extradition
treaty.
We have a robust law enforcement information-sharing relationship
with the Government of Mexico. We have engaged them for many months on
Guzman's case. However, for specific questions related to law
enforcement information, I must refer you to the U.S. Drug Enforcement
Administration and the Department of Justice.
Question #6. Migrants from the Northern Triangle Countries of El
Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras have increasingly made their way to
the United States through Mexico. Since mid-2014, Mexico has stepped up
immigration enforcement along the major routes traversed by many
Central American migrants.
How effective have those actions been?
To what extent have those efforts been in response to U.S.
pressure?
How is Mexico balancing the need to combat illegal
transmigration through its territory with the need to protect
migrants' rights and well-being?
What steps has the United States taken to ensure that
illegal migrants are treated humanely when being repatriated to
their home countries by Mexico?
If confirmed as Ambassador to Mexico, what message will you
convey to the Government of Mexico and the people of Mexico to
discourage illegal immigration to the United States?
Answer. Cooperation with Mexico on migration issues has been
excellent. In June 2014, President Pena Nieto expressed his commitment
to President Obama to return children safely to their families in
Central America, build Central American capacity to receive returned
children, and address the underlying factors driving migration. We
believe Mexico's increased enforcement, including against human
smuggling, as well as its efforts to share best practices on migration
management with Central American governments have been significant
factors in reducing the number of migrants apprehended by U.S.
immigration officials at our southern border.
As I noted during the confirmation hearing, bilateral cooperation
on migration issues has increased. As the U.S. Government continues to
secure our border and the Mexican economy improves, the Mexican
Government realizes that many migrants may choose to stay in Mexico
instead of trying to enter the United States. Therefore, Mexico has an
added incentive to continue working with the United States to ensure
orderly, safe, and legal migration.
We have seen reports expressing concerns of inadequate protection
of the rights of migrants apprehended and repatriated by Mexican
authorities. We discuss these issues with our Mexican counterparts on a
regular basis. For example, during the third meeting of the U.S.-Mexico
Repatriation Strategy and Policy Executive Coordination Team on
February 25, 2015, we discussed ways to align U.S. and Mexican
resources and to ensure safe and humane treatment of migrants through
the coordination of repatriation policies.
If confirmed, I will continue to press the importance of orderly,
safe, and legal immigration and support the Department's public
education efforts in the region to discourage illegal migration.
Question #7. In a previous hearing before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee you provided testimony regarding U.S. sanctions
toward individual human rights violators in Venezuela. During the
question and answers portion of the hearing, you specifically stated
that recognized opposition leaders from the MUD (Mesa Unidad
Democratica) had requested that no sanctions be levied. In fact, you
repeated the same answer when the question was raised on two separate
occasions. However, after the hearing, the MUD put out a statement that
was completely opposite of what you testified to the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee.
How do you explain this contradiction?
Answer. Twenty-seven political parties comprise Venezuela's
opposition; each with different philosophies and strategies. At the
time of the SFRC hearing in 2014, the government and some members of
the political opposition were engaged in dialogue facilitated by the
Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) with the involvement of the
Vatican. However, other important elements of the opposition, students,
and other protesters were skeptical of that dialogue and remained
outside it. We respect all these legitimate, yet distinct, views.
The opposition elements engaged in that dialogue asked that the
U.S. Government not act in a way that would undermine it. As I
testified, we believed that both the timing and any action on sanctions
should be calibrated in such a way as not to undermine that dialogue--
so long as it offered a realistic chance of progress. It was that view
that informed our belief that timing was not right for sanctions at
that time. Regrettably, the Venezuelan Government failed to make any
concessions in the context of that dialogue, and it ended, prompting us
to impose targeted sanctions.
On July 30, 2014 and February 2, 2015, we took steps to impose visa
restrictions against 56 individuals believed to be responsible for, or
complicit in, human rights abuses and public corruption pursuant to
Section 212(a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality Act.
On March 8, 2015, President Obama signed Executive Order 13692
targeting not only persons (i.e., individuals and entities) involved in
or responsible for actions that limit or prohibit the exercise of
freedom of expression or peaceful assembly and significant acts of
violence that constitute a serious abuse or violation of human rights,
including in response to antigovernment protests, but also those
involved in public corruption and actions or policies that undermine
democratic processes or institutions within the Government of
Venezuela. Seven individuals were placed on the Office of Foreign
Assets Control's List of Specially Designated Individuals and Blocked
Persons (SDN List). Consequently, their property and interests in
property subject to U.S. jurisdiction were blocked, and U.S. persons
wherever located are generally prohibited from doing business with
them. The E.O. also suspends the entry into the United States of any
individual designated pursuant to the E.O.
Question #8. There have been recent media reports that former
legislator Maria Corina Machado has been prohibited from running for
office in Venezuela's upcoming December's congressional elections.
What is the USG's position on this undemocratic measure
taken by the Government of Venezuela designed to influence the
outcome of the upcoming elections?
Answer. The United States is deeply concerned about the Venezuelan
Government's continuing effort to prohibit opponents from participating
in the political process. Prohibiting select opposition members from
taking office is an abuse of power intended to silence and punish
critics. Restricting opposition candidates weakens the electoral
process and undermines the principle of democratic pluralism. This is
why I publicly expressed my concern via Twitter upon learning of the
action against Ms. Machado.
We join the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights (UNHCHR), the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), the European Union
(EU), and the Canadian, Italian, Norwegian, and Spanish Governments in
calling on the Venezuelan Government to cease efforts to silence the
political opposition, further weaken democratic institutions, and for
it to release political prisoners and respect human rights and
fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of peaceful assembly and
association.
We will continue to call on the Venezuelan Government to ensure
free and fair elections by ceasing harassment of the opposition and
allowing credible, independent international electoral observation.
Free and fair elections, an essential element of a healthy democracy,
require a society that encourages full citizen participation,
opportunities for all individuals to become candidates, free operation
of political parties and candidates, and flourishing independent media.
All these conditions are consistent with the principles and values set
forth in the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and
the Inter-American Democratic Charter.
Question #9. The Venezuela Defense of Human Rights and Civil
Society Act of 2014 imposes targeted sanctions on persons responsible
for violations of human rights of antigovernment protesters in
Venezuela. In May of last year, you told this committee that the time
was ``not right'' for sanctions on human rights violators in Venezuela.
As you know, President Obama eventually signed this bill into law in
December.
Why has Miguel Rodriguez Torres, the Minister of Interior,
Justice, and Peace not been sanctioned under this law?
What about Hugo Carvajal, the head of the Directorate of
military intelligence?
What about Diosdado Cabello, President of the National
Assembly of Venezuela, reportedly the most corrupt man in
Venezuela?
Answer. The action taken in March was a significant list that holds
key individuals accountable, including based on involvement in human
rights abuses and undermining democratic processes or institutions,
including through public corruption.
We will continue to monitor developments on the ground and stand
prepared to take action against others as additional information
becomes available and is assessed to meet the criteria for sanctions.
Question #10. Mrs. Jacobson, you were the lead U.S. negotiator for
the recently announced agreement to reestablish diplomatic relations
between the United States and Cuba.
As such, do you fully standby the results of the deal announced by
President Obama, which you negotiated, to reestablish diplomatic
relations between the United States and Cuba?
Do you believe the Obama administration's efforts to reestablish
diplomatic relations will help preserve the Castro regime and Communist
one party rule in Cuba or lead to democratic reforms?
Answer. Yes, I stand by our agreement with the Government of Cuba.
Our new approach to Cuba will make it easier for the United States to
advance our interests and result in greater prosperity for the Cuban
people. For almost 55 years, we tried using isolation to bring about
change in Cuba. However, as the President stated on December 17, that
approach was not working. Instead of bringing about change, we ended up
focusing the international community's attention on U.S. policy rather
than on the negative effects of the Cuban Government's policies on the
Cuban people.
Reopening the U.S. Embassy in Havana and reestablishing diplomatic
relations are the first steps in a long process of normalization. By
engaging the Cubans through U.S. Embassy Havana, we will improve our
access to the Cuban Government and our ability to advance our interests
on a variety of issues, which include human rights, law enforcement,
extraditions, counternarcotics, property claims, and the environment.
Our new approach also allows us greater contact with the Cuban people,
who ultimately will have the power to choose their own future. In
recognition of that reality, our diplomats will be able to travel more
freely around island and engage with the Cuban people more effectively.
We understand that change will not come to Cuba overnight. There
may well be setbacks on the path to normalization of U.S.-Cuba
relations. However, by engaging the Cuban Government in an atmosphere
of mutual respect, we hope to promote our interests more effectively
and increase the prospects of the Cuban Government respecting the human
rights and fundamental freedoms of its own people, thereby becoming
prosperous and democratic.
Question #11. Please provide a copy of the agreement you negotiated
with the Cuban Government to reestablish diplomatic relations outlining
the key commitments made by each side.
Answer. From January 21 to July 1, I led a Department team in
negotiating the conditions under which the proposed new embassies of
the United States and Cuba in our respective countries would operate.
That process culminated in the exchange of letters between President
Obama and President Castro on July 1, 2015, in which they jointly
agreed to reestablish diplomatic relations and reopen Embassies
effective July 20. The only legally binding agreement concluded between
the two countries in the course of these negotiations was an agreement
to terminate the Interests Section Agreement of 1977, which was
effected through an exchange of diplomatic notes on July 20.
Several members of my staff briefed Congress on the key outcomes of
the negotiations. One example of these outcomes is that United States
diplomats will be able to meet and exchange opinions with Cubans with a
variety of voices and views, both within the government and outside. We
will reciprocally loosen the travel restrictions on both missions. We
have a good start on diplomatic shipments that will allow us to upgrade
several physical aspects of the Embassy. Finally, we have agreed with
the Cubans to review these conditions in the coming year to see what
adjustments need to be made.
Question #12. According to Section 201 of the Cuban Liberty and
Democratic Solidarity Act, it is the policy of the United States that
diplomatic recognition should be considered ``when the President
determines that there exists a democratically elected government in
Cuba.''
Did the President determine that ``there exists a
democratically elected government in Cuba?''
Answer. No, he did not. The President's new direction in policy
toward Cuba maintains the long-standing objective of empowering the
Cuban people and promoting a democratic, stable, and prosperous Cuba.
The reestablishment of diplomatic relations is a key step in
implementing this updated approach. Having the U.S. Embassy in Havana
allows the United States to more effectively promote U.S. interests and
values and increase engagement with the Cuban people.
Question #13. In a tweet from April 1 you said ``engagement is the
best way to bring freedom and opportunity to people of #Cuba and to
promote America's national interests.''
We are all familiar with the numerous unilateral
concessions the U.S. has given to the Castro regime. However,
what freedoms have the Obama administration's policy of
engagement secured for the Cuban people?
Answer. Through increased travel and communication between Cubans
on the island and people in the United States, which is a key part of
the administration's new approach, the Cuban people will be empowered
through greater access to information and resources. People-to-people
ties will be strengthened, and result in the building of bridges to
bolster and broaden the normalization process.
This approach is already working. For example, we have seen an
increase of about 35 percent in U.S. travel to Cuba this year, a deal
by IDT Corporation, a New Jersey based telecommunications company, to
handle direct long-distance phone traffic from Cuba, and the Cuban
Government's release of a broadband strategy that acknowledged its low
household penetration rate of less than 5 percent and set the ambitious
goal of achieving more than 50 percent by 2020. Moreover, in June the
Cuban Government announced plans to open 35 public wi-fi hotspots for
half the current price. We believe increased access to the Internet is
fundamental to the free flow of information, and to the ability of the
Cuban people to freely express themselves. We see this having enormous
potential to connect the Cuban people with the rest of the world.
We believe our policy of empowering the Cuban people with greater
access to information and resources will help foster prosperity for
Cuban citizens. To this end, changes that went into effect on January
16 increase the amount of remittances permitted under general licenses
and authorize expanded commercial sales from the United States of
certain goods and services for use by private sector entrepreneurs and
agricultural workers.
Question #14. Secretary Jacobson, in your testimony to this Senate
Foreign Relations Committee on February 3, you stated: ``We are already
seeing indications that our updated approach gives us a greater ability
to engage other nations in the hemisphere and around the world in
promoting respect for fundamental freedoms in Cuba.''
Since the President's December 17 announcement, there has been a
slew of foreign dignitaries, business leaders, and Members of this
Congress traveling to Cuba. They have all followed the same script,
focusing on meetings with regime officials and ignoring Cuba's
courageous dissidents. For example, one would be hard-pressed to find
any foreign dignitary, business leader, or Member of this Congress, who
has met with Berta Soler, the head of The Ladies in White, while in
Havana. And that is the most-world renowned democracy group in Cuba.
As Yoani Sanchez recently wrote, ``a true shower of Presidents,
Foreign Ministers and deputies has intensified over Cuba without daily
life feeling any kind of relief from such illustrious presences.''
Meanwhile, political arrests in Cuba continue to rise. Since
December 17, there have already been over 2,500 documented arrests. We
have seen an increase in violent tactics, like this week against
democracy leader Antonio Rodiles, who literally had his nose shattered
by secret police officials, requiring emergency surgery.
Why are all of these foreign dignitaries and businessmen
shunning Cuba's democracy activists during their trips to
Havana? Is it because the Cuban regime has made it clear that
visits with dissidents would result in having meeting with
regime officials canceled? As such, has this not further
empowered the regime?
What are some specific, recent examples of nations in this
hemisphere promoting fundamental freedoms in Cuba, as you
testified to this committee would take place?
Answer. We regularly urge foreign governments and other
international organizations to raise human rights issues with the Cuban
Government and meet with a broad range of Cuban society including
independent civil society, both inside and outside of Cuba. The U.S.
mission in Havana has maintained long-standing contacts with diverse
and respected Cuban dissidents. Several Members of Congress, including
Representative Pelosi and Senator Flake, met with Cuban civil society
representatives during previous visits to Havana. Moreover, the
President has expressed his confidence in the American people as being
the best ambassadors of our principles and values. That would include
U.S. businesses.
The United States remains committed to supporting vibrant civil
society and forward progress on human rights issues in Cuba. To that
end, we continue to encourage other governments and international
organizations to raise human rights concerns in their meetings with the
Cuban Government. We believe our previous policy of isolation was
counterproductive in that it made it more difficult for the United
States to advance this goal. Under our new policy approach to Cuba,
U.S. diplomats will have greater access to engage directly with the
Cuban Government on a range of issues and in particular, on human
rights.
We believe U.S. engagement with Cuba will also result in greater
visibility and greater support internationally for Cuban civil society.
For the first time, independent Cuban civil society groups attended the
Summit of the Americas in Panama City this year. Cuban dissidents
participated in President Obama's meeting with civil society at the
summit, along with the Presidents of Uruguay and Costa Rica. Moreover,
we have been able to bring together third country ambassadors on the
island with dissidents for the first time. These opportunities give
dissidents not permitted to travel, access to such diplomats for the
first time. Cuban Government-organized groups tried to block and
publicly clashed with independent Cuban groups, who demonstrated their
maturity and professionalism with substantive participation in the
summit process. We believe these public incidents served to place a
spotlight for the rest of the region on the restrictive environment in
which Cuban civil society operates and raise awareness of this issue
for the benefit of many government representatives and civil society
groups from around the hemisphere. Finally, increasing the free flow of
information to and from Cuba, a key component of the President's
policy, will help amplify new voices from Cuba and increase information
to activists on the island.
Question #15. During the President's December 17 announcement, he
``welcomed'' the Cuban regime's decision to provide more access to
international institutions, specifically the International Committee of
the Red Cross, which promotes universal values.
Has the Cuban regime allowed the ICRC to visit prison
conditions in Cuba, as they have repeatedly requested and been
denied, but President Obama announced? Have you discussed this
issue, which is one of the very few things the Cuban regime
apparently promised President Obama for the litany of
concessions given?
How many Cubans have been jailed since December 17?
Answer. In the March session of the Human Rights Council, Cuban
Foreign Minister Rodriguez extended an invitation to the president of
the ICRC to visit Cuba. We are not aware of visits by the ICRC to
monitor prison conditions, and ultimately, the scheduling and specific
details of visits by international human rights organizations to Cuba
are determined by the Cuban Government and those international actors,
respectively. We have and continue to use the opportunities presented
by our new approach to Cuba to urge the Cuban Government to schedule
these and other visits by international human rights bodies in order to
provide for greater transparency and allow for objective assessments of
the state of Cuba's prisons. We will encourage other countries to urge
the same.
During my January 22 visit to Cuba, I urged the Cuban Government to
provide prison access to the U.N. and other international
organizations. We will continue to press for greater access--and for
the Cuban Government to live up to Raul Castro's statement that ``Cuba
reiterates its willingness to cooperate in multilateral bodies, such as
the United Nations.''
Independent civil society groups track the number of short-term
arbitrary detentions of activists who are freely exercising their human
rights and fundamental freedoms. From January through June 2015, the
independent group Comision Cubana de Derechos Humanos y Reconciliacion
Nacional (Cuban Commission of Human Rights and National Reconciliation)
documented 2,822 short-term detentions.
Question #16. Cuba is considered a hard target by the Intelligence
Community and has an aggressive intelligence collection posture against
the United States. The United States is considered the principal target
from the Cuban intelligence apparatus. The U.S. employs hundreds of
Cuban nationals at the U.S. Interests Section in Havana. This is
clearly a significant counterintelligence threat.
While I recognize that it is not possible to have every
person working at the Interests Section a U.S. person, do you
support efforts to have supervisory positions headed up by U.S.
persons who have undergone a background investigation to ensure
we are taking reasonable steps to counter the CI threat at our
diplomatic facilities in Cuba?
Answer. No. Given the unique nature of working in Cuba, we have a
dynamic program in place to ensure the safety and security of personnel
and sensitive information.
Our operations in Havana and around the world dictate we use local
staff for supervisory positions in some Embassy functions (motorpool,
administrative, and consular, for example). Utilizing locally hired
staff results in significant costs savings as compared to U.S. direct-
hire employees. As is standard practice at our embassies throughout the
world, an American employee with a security clearance in the direct
chain of the employee must review all Cuban staff and sign off on their
employee evaluations. As a result, each Cuban employee of the U.S.
Embassy in Havana is supervised by a cleared American employee.
Furthermore, Cuban employees at the Embassy do not have the authority
to make hiring or dismissal decisions, nor can they implement
disciplinary actions.
Question #17. According to the State Department's annual
Trafficking in Persons Report, Cuba has been a Tier 3 country since
they were first evaluated in 2003.
Is the State Department planning on moving Cuba to Tier
Watch List 2?
What specific actions have the Cuban Government taken to
justify its improvement in ranking?
Answer. The Department will be releasing this year's Trafficking in
Persons (TIP) Report soon. It would be premature to comment on any
particular outcome; whatever conclusions are reached with respect to
individual countries will both be based on a pragmatic analysis of the
best information possible and reinforce our strong interest in human
rights around the world.
The TIP Report covers 188 countries and territories in detail.
Consistently over the past 14 years, it has provided detailed analyses
and meaningful recommendations for advancing global efforts to fight
trafficking. As with any nation, the United States seeks to cooperate
with Cuba in eliminating trafficking in persons.
Question #18. During a special briefing on May 19, 2015, regarding
the Ongoing Discussions with Cuba to Re-Establish Diplomatic Relations
and Reopen Embassies, an anonymous senior State Department official
stated the following via teleconference:
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: ``I can certainly reiterate
that the status of Guantanamo is not a part of these talks.''
As I had said months ago, it is not on the table. The question
of why, or why not, I think is a question--the President has
made clear he's not interested in having that conversation. But
we've made clear that the issue of Guantanamo is not on the
table at this point, and I don't--I can't say what the future
may bring on this, but it's not on the table right now, and I
don't know that there's a reason to justify having it or not
having it. And you certainly heard the Cubans' view on this,
but it's not under discussion at this point.
That official went on to say of U.S. democracy programs:
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL: ``On the question of
democracy programs, I think the thing that you have to remember
is the democracy programs, in their history since I think about
1996 when they began, have changed over time. And they will
continue to change over time to reflect a reality, whether that
reality is on the ground in Cuba or in the United States. When
the democracy programs began, for example, Cubans could not
travel nearly as freely as they now can. Ever since the change
in policy by the Cuban Government in 2013, many more people can
travel, which means people can do things and participate in
things outside of Cuba as opposed to inside of it.
``I think we always have to be cognizant of making sure that
when we are supporting the Cuban people, we're doing it in a
way that is the most effective. We've moved forward with
requests for funding in the past couple of years, and we've
done that most recently in FY16. But I think we have to be
careful not to ever have thought that those programs were
static and separate from changes in the environment in which
they're working.''
Were you that anonymous official?
Was that official expressing a change in U.S. policy on the
strategic importance of Naval Station Guantanamo?
How do you anticipate democracy programs in Cuba to
``change over time?''
Answer. The Department does not normally provide the names of
officials who are asked to do background briefings for the press.
However, I can affirm to you that there has been no change in U.S.
policy regarding the strategic importance of Naval Station Guantanamo.
We have not discussed the status of Naval Station Guantanamo with the
Cuban Government during these discussions. I reiterate Secretary
Kerry's statement on July 20 that ``at this time, there is no
discussion and no intention on our part at this moment to alter the
existing lease treaty or other arrangements with respect to the naval
station.''
U.S. assistance supports civil society initiatives that promote
democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms, particularly freedom
of expression. The promotion of democratic principles and human rights
remains the core goal of U.S. assistance. Through regular interagency
meetings, the Department and USAID work together to review programs,
identifying the most successful programming areas to date and making
note of new or as-yet unreached audiences, so that future programs
among the agencies will be complementary and highly effective.
Following Cuba's lifting of travel restrictions in early 2013, more
civil society members have been able to participate in training
opportunities outside of Cuba, increasing their professional networks.
In addition, as the staff members at the U.S. Embassy in Havana are
able to engage a wider range of Cuban society, new areas of focus for
our programming may develop, consistent with applicable U.S.
legislation.
Question #19. On January 18, 2015, Argentinian prosecutor Alberto
Nisman was found dead of a gunshot wound in his apartment located in in
Buenos Aires, Argentina. Nisman was the principal investigative
prosecutor in the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) bombing
investigation, killed 85 people and wounded more than 300. Nisman's
investigation revealed the involvement of Iran and Hezbollah in the
attack and led to the issuance of Interpol ``Red Notices'' (detainment
notices) for the identified conspirators.
Have you seen any analysis of the Nisman death that would
lead you to conclude that he was murdered?
Answer. There has been a great deal of analysis and speculation
concerning the causes of and responsibility for Prosecutor Nisman's
death; however, to date the investigation has been inconclusive. Since
the death of Prosecutor Nisman, both the Department and our Embassy in
Buenos Aires have pushed for a complete, transparent, and impartial
investigation into Mr. Nisman's death. Through our Embassy in Buenos
Aires, we have been in contact with Argentine law enforcement officials
to offer U.S. assistance to the investigation.
Question #20. The Millennium Challenge Corporation's Compact-
Eligibility Country Selection Criteria and Methodology includes a
competitive selection process that judges each country's performance in
three areas, ruling justly; investing in people and economic freedom.
Do you believe that El Salvador's Government is worthy of
MCC funds that are intended for countries that are ``governing
justly'' and upholding the rule of law?
Are you aware of any discussion among officers of your
bureau or with MCC staff that the standards were being lowered
to accommodate El Salvador's second MCC grant of $277 million?
Can you describe such deliberations in detail?
Answer. To determine countries' eligibility to receive compacts MCC
utilizes a scorecard that measures the extent to which a country rules
justly, respects economic freedom, and invests in its people. MCC has
determined that El Salvador meets these requirements. Additionally, El
Salvador was a strong partner in implementing their first MCC compact.
MCC monitors its partner countries before and during compact
implementation. MCC has shown that it will take action--up to and
including suspension or termination--if an MCC partner is engaged in a
pattern of actions inconsistent with the agency's principles and
selection criteria. The Salvadoran Government committed to contribute
$88.2 million on top of MCC's investment, constituting a combined total
of $365.2 million.
When MCC's Board of Directors approved the compact in September
2013, MCC stated its expectation that the Salvadoran Government needed
to make tangible and sustained progress on improving the investment
climate and strengthening the rule of law. Progress in these areas will
help ensure that MCC's investment achieves long-term and sustainable
results.
Once the Salvadoran Government presented a solid plan to address
these issues and made tangible and sustained progress on addressing
them, MCC moved forward with signing the compact in September 2014.
Among other reforms and commitments obtained from the Salvadoran
Government as a condition for compact signing, the Legislative Assembly
passed reforms to the antimoney laundering regime prior to the signing
and the Salvadoran Government committed to further reforms
criminalizing bulk cash smuggling and regulating money remitters. Now
that the compact is signed, the focus is on successful implementation
of the projects, which include further reforms to improve the
investment climate.
Question #21. On January 30, 2015, I wrote a letter to Secretary
Kerry expressing concern about the Government of Uruguay's handling of
six Guantanamo Bay detainees transferred to Uruguay in December 2014.
In that letter, I requested ``the written agreement between the U.S.
Department of State and the Government of Uruguay'' related to the
transfer of these detainees. Following several briefings, the State
Department informed my staff and Senator Corker's staff that there was
no written agreement. On May 20, 2015, Chairman Corker formally
requested ``All diplomatic notes, cables, and other documents
describing any commitments, understandings, or other agreements or
arrangements between the United States Government and the Government of
Uruguay related to the transfer and subsequent disposition of the
Guantanamo Bay detainees transferred late last year.''
Please provide these documents.
Answer. The Department appreciates Congress' important oversight
responsibilities on these transfers and is committed to providing
information to enable your committee to perform that function. That
said, the Department, across two administrations, has consistently
informed Congress, and represented to U.S. courts, that disclosing
these diplomatic assurances would have a chilling effect on foreign
governments' willingness to cooperate on detainee transfers.
Accordingly, these sensitive diplomatic communications containing
foreign government information are kept to a limited executive branch
dissemination. Indeed, foreign governments have noted that disclosure
outside of this limited dissemination could endanger future cooperation
related to detainee transfers, which would harm cooperative efforts to
mitigate any threat posed by transferred detainees.
The Department is happy to brief you or your staff further on these
issues.
Question #22. If confirmed, what will be your approach regarding
raising U.S. concerns related to corruption, religious freedom, and
human rights in Mexico? How will you, as Ambassador, broach what are
often sensitive issues with a close democratic partner?
Answer. We have a strong, positive relationship with Mexico that
allows us to raise issues of concern in a respectful, productive
manner. If confirmed as Ambassador, I will work to maintain a
constructive partnership such that we can forthrightly share viewpoints
and work together to resolve areas of concern in a proactive and direct
manner.
Cooperation on anticorruption and good governance are a core part
of the bilateral agenda. President Pena Nieto signed Mexico's
anticorruption bill into law in May. The legislation will strengthen
oversight of public officials and designates a special prosecutor to
tackle corruption issues. Mexico is also a founding member of the Open
Government Partnership and its willingness to chair the initiative for
the next year is a signal of President Pena Nieto's desire to improve
governance in Mexico.
We are actively engaged with Mexico on human rights issues, and we
have established a formal mechanism, the Bilateral Human Rights
Dialogue that brings together officials from the Departments of State,
Defense, Homeland Security, Justice, and other U.S. Government agencies
to meet with Mexican counterparts, to review and discuss a wide range
of human rights issues.
In addition to the formal Bilateral Dialogue, we regularly meet
with government officials at all levels, as well as with civil society
and human rights groups, to discuss both general issues and specific
cases--including issues related to religious freedom. If confirmed, I
will work to strengthen these efforts and ensure human rights concerns
remain a central element of our bilateral relationship.
__________
ambassador-designate jacobson's responses to additional
follow-up questions from senator rubio
Question. Mrs. Jacobson, the Obama administration stated that its
January 2015 changes to U.S. regulations regarding commerce and travel
to Cuba were tailored to ``support the Cuban people.'' Yet, in a recent
newspaper article about the limited commerce resulting from this new
policy because of the Cuban Government's insistence on funneling U.S.
transactions through its monopolies, rather than allowing the Cuban
people to benefit directly, you were quoted as stating that the new
rules were ``a work in progress. Cubans are getting used to it; our
business people are getting used to it. We are going to tweak. We may
not have written them right.''
What portion of the administration's new Cuba regulations
was ``not written right?''
Do you agree that accommodating increased U.S. commerce
through the Cuban Government's monopolies does not ``support
the Cuban people'' and that such benefiting of the Cuban
Government's oligarchs contravenes the previously stated
purpose of the Obama administration's Cuba policy and
legislative limitations on U.S. Policy toward Cuba as codified
in law?
Answer. The regulatory amendments introduced January 16 by the
Departments of Commerce and the Treasury, consistent with the
President's December 17, 2014, announcement, were developed through a
comprehensive interagency process in order to increase the flow of
information and resources in support and for the benefit of the Cuban
people. These changes, among other things, ease travel restrictions,
facilitate certain exports, and increase the amount of remittances that
may be sent to individual Cubans. This administration is strongly
committed to ensuring that the spirit of the President's new direction
on Cuba policy is implemented in practice, and that U.S. persons are
able to engage with and support the Cuban people. The regulations were
published 1 month after the President's announcement, and in the
following months many individuals, NGOs, and businesses have begun to
use these authorizations. There is no question that these measures have
already had a substantial positive impact on the Cuban people. However,
across sanctions programs, the U.S. Government makes every effort to
ensure that authorizations have the intended impact--something that
cannot be ensured until they are used. To this end, the State
Department supports amendments and changes to regulations to help
ensure that our foreign policy goals continue to be fully met.
The January 16 regulatory amendments are consistent with U.S. law
and with our foreign policy goals. Increased travel and interaction
between the United States and Cuba, and limited commerce in certain
areas (e.g., exports of agricultural commodities, medicines and medical
devices, items for use by the Cuban private sector, consumer
communications devices, and telecommunications equipment) serve to
build people-to-people ties and increase the flow of information and
resources to the Cuban people.
Question. Related to the case of notorious Mexican drug lord ``El
Chapo'' Guzman:
What was the first date on which you discussed the Guzman
case with Mexican officials?
What was the last date on which you discussed the Guzman
case with Mexican officials?
As Assistant Secretary, were you personally aware of any
information suggesting that Guzman was plotting an escape?
If so, did you convey this information to Mexican
officials?
Answer. Extradition of Joaquin ``El Chapo'' Guzman has been the
subject of discussions between the United States and Mexico for a
number of years. Pursuant to the U.S./Mexico Extradition Treaty, in
advance of submitting a full extradition request, either country may
seek from the other a provisional arrest warrant for a fugitive; the
treaty further contemplates that, after the fugitive has been arrested,
a full extradition package will be submitted. We can confirm that, at
the request of the United States, Mexico issued such a provisional
arrest warrant more than a decade ago.
After the Mexican Government recaptured Guzman on February 22,
2014, I and others in the U.S. Government and in Embassy Mexico City
discussed the Guzman case with Mexican officials and underscored the
strong interest of the United States in seeking his extradition. We
remained in close contact with the Mexican Government and subsequent to
the arrest of Guzman last year, the United States submitted a full
extradition request to Mexico.
U.S. Attorney General Lynch spoke with Mexican Attorney General
Gomez on July 12--within 24 hours after Guzman's escape--to offer full
support to the Mexican Government in its efforts to recapture him. The
United States and Mexico are working closely together through law
enforcement and diplomatic channels at all levels to coordinate efforts
and resources to recapture Guzman.
Both Mexican and U.S. authorities were well aware of Guzman's
history and previous escape. During Guzman's recent incarceration, the
U.S. Government discussed with Mexican authorities information
concerning his criminal associates' desire to break him out of prison;
however, this information was general, nonspecific, and spoke to
intent, not the actual planning, means, or timing of an escape attempt.
Question. Regarding your 2014 testimony on the human rights
situation in Venezuela: Did the recognized leaders of Mesa Unidad
Democratica ask you directly to ensure that the U.S. Government not act
in a way that would undermine the ongoing dialogue?
Which members of the political opposition whom were engaged
in the dialogue did you speak with?
Please explain how the answer to my question for the record
is consistent with your clarification for the record last year
indicating that you had not been in touch with members of the
opposition involved in the dialogue?
Answer. Both my clarification for the record last year and my
response to your question for the record are consistent with my
testimony.
Over the last several years, in Washington and elsewhere, I have
had the opportunity to speak with many members of the diverse
Venezuelan political opposition, private sector, civil society, and
government.
The political opposition is in an extremely difficult position in
Venezuela, and not all members of the opposition agree on how to
further their political objectives. I respect the varying opinions and
perspectives among leaders of the MUD. When developing U.S. policy, we
remain mindful of the on-the-ground situation and the possible
consequences of our actions. There was no direct request that we
refrain from sanctions, but we were at that time extremely aware of the
context of the dialogue and its fragility.
Question. On Question 9 related to the Venezuela Defense of Human
Rights and Civil Society Act of 2014, please provide a written response
or a briefing in the appropriate setting explaining why these
individuals have not been sanctioned.
Miguel Rodriguez Torres, the Minister of Interior, Justice;
and Peace Hugo Carvajal, the head of the Directorate of
military intelligence Diosdado Cabello, President of the
National Assembly of Venezuela.
Answer. Each determination on whether and when to impose targeted
measures, including visa restrictions or asset blocking, takes into
account U.S. law and whether the measures are likely to advance U.S.
foreign policy interests in addition to the specific information we
have on individuals. These interests include respect for the human
rights of the Venezuelan people, democratic governance and pluralism,
and regional security and stability.
On September 12, 2008, the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office
of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated Hugo Armando Carvajal
Barrios under the Kingpin Act. That action froze any assets Carvajal
may have under U.S. jurisdiction and prohibited any U.S. persons from
conducting financial or commercial transactions involving those assets.
The steps the Department took in July 2014 and February 2015 to
restrict visa eligibility for individuals believed to be responsible
for, or complicit in, human rights abuses and public corruption were
carried out pursuant to Section 212 (a)(3)(C) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act. Visa confidentiality laws restrict us from naming
those individuals.
We continue to monitor developments on the ground and stand
prepared to take action against others as additional information
becomes available and is assessed in terms of U.S. law and foreign
policy interests.
Question. On Question 11, please provide any documents that outline
the agreement you negotiated, legally binding or otherwise, between the
United States and Cuba regarding the number of personnel allowed at
each Embassy and the conditions under which the Embassies will operate.
If this is not provided in the exchange of notes or letters, please
provide the relevant reporting cables.
Answer. We appreciate and welcome the strong interest that you and
other Members of Congress have in ensuring that our U.S. Embassy in
Cuba will be able to fully perform its duties and functions. We also
appreciate that Congress has important oversight responsibilities in
this regard and we are committed to providing as much information as
possible to ensure that Congress can perform this function.
As you know, on July 7 senior officials from the U.S. State
Department's Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs and Bureau of
Diplomatic Security provided a classified briefing to Foreign Relations
Committee staff, including members of your staff, which covered all
substantive aspects of the agreement, including the numbers of
personnel at each Embassy and the conditions under which the Embassies
will operate. We would be happy to continue briefing your staff to
answer any additional questions you may have and to update you as the
bilateral relationship progresses.
Question. On Question 12, are you arguing that the administration's
Cuba policy complies with Section 201 of the Cuban Liberty and
Democratic Solidarity Act and if so, how? If not, has the
administration concluded it is not bound by this law and if so, why?
Answer. The administration's Cuba policy is consistent with all
applicable law. Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution grants the
President the authority to ``receive Ambassadors and other public
Ministers.'' This grant of authority has long been understood to
provide the President with the exclusive authority to establish
diplomatic relations with foreign nations. Presidents throughout our
history have used their constitutional authority to establish or
reestablish diplomatic relations with foreign nations, and there are
numerous recent examples of Presidents from both parties doing so.
Section 201 of the Cuban Liberty and Democratic Solidarity
(``LIBERTAD'') Act of 1996 provides that it is the policy of the United
States ``[t]o consider the restoration of diplomatic recognition and
support the reintegration of the Cuban Government into Inter-American
organizations when the President determines that there exists a
democratically elected government in Cuba.'' While the provision thus
indicates that the United States should consider restoration of
diplomatic recognition if the specified condition is met, it does not
by its terms purport to prohibit the President from exercising his
exclusive constitutional authority with respect to recognition in other
circumstances. Consistent with long-standing constitutional practice
and President Clinton's statement on signing the LIBERTAD Act, we
construe this provision to be precatory to avoid interfering with the
President's constitutional authority to reestablish diplomatic
relations with Cuba.
Question. On Question 13, what is the percentage increase in
Internet access in Cuba since December 17, 2014?
Answer. Data are not available to estimate the increase in Internet
access in Cuba since December 17 with sufficient accuracy. However,
public pressure for Internet access has swelled in recent months,
evidenced in part by a substantial increase in demand for Cubans' use
of the Internet Center at Embassy Havana. The January 16 regulatory
changes enable U.S. telecommunications firms to export the equipment
and services needed to rapidly expand Internet connectivity.
The Cuban National Assembly posted updates regarding its July 14
session on official Twitter and Facebook accounts, suggesting the Cuban
Government's acknowledgment of the need to adapt to greater
international interconnectivity. In June, the Cuban Government
announced the addition of 35 Wi-Fi hotspots and a reduction in Internet
access rates from $4.50 to $2.00. While this rate is still too
expensive for the average Cuban, we assess the Cuban Government finally
realizes its Internet penetration rate of less than 5 percent is too
low for the country to thrive in a global economy. For the moment,
however, reliable, legal, and affordable Internet access remains out of
reach for the average Cuban citizen.
Question. With regards to Question 16, please answer the following
questions:
How many non-U.S. persons currently work in U.S. diplomatic
facilities in Cuba?
How many are projected to work there next year? Are there
plans to hire additional non-U.S. persons?
How many non-U.S. persons currently hold supervisory
positions in U.S. diplomatic facilities in Cuba?
Do any of these individuals have access to sensitive areas
within the U.S. Embassy compound such as access to the
Ambassador, DCM or other senior leader's office space, access
to the same floor as a sensitive compartmented information
facility or the motor pool vehicles used by senior U.S.
diplomats and visiting delegations?
How does the State Department define ``supervisory'' in
this instance?
Please list the positions defined as supervisory that are
currently held by non-U.S. persons.
Have any of these individuals undergone a background check
or polygraph test?
If so, who conducted the background checks or polygraph
tests?
What would it cost to replace each non-U.S. person
supervisor currently working in a U.S. diplomatic facility in
Cuba with a cleared U.S. person?
Answer. There are currently 294 non-U.S. persons working in U.S.
diplomatic facilities in Cuba. We have several authorized positions
that are currently vacant and hope to fill 10-15 of these in the next
year.
We employ local staff in Havana in positions that entail some
oversight of local staff, as we do at all embassies throughout the
world. In Havana, approximately 40 Cubans have some oversight of other
Cuban employees. No Cuban employees supervise American staff. Each
Cuban employee has an American supervisor. Cuban employees do not have
the authority to make hiring or dismissal decisions, nor can they
implement disciplinary actions.
Access to our facilities in Havana is strictly controlled. As with
other embassies around the world, there are certain areas within the
Embassy that only cleared Americans can access.
The following positions have some oversight or administrative
responsibility for less experienced Cuban staff and are currently held
by non-U.S. persons:
Senior HR Assistant
Senior Storekeeper