[Senate Hearing 115-607]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


                                                     S. Hrg. 115-607

                       NOMINATION HEARINGS OF THE
                     115TH CONGRESS_SECOND SESSION

=======================================================================

                                HEARINGS

                               BEFORE THE

                     COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                     ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                             SECOND SESSION

                               ----------                              

                   JANUARY 3, 2018 TO JANUARY 3, 2019

                               ----------                              


       Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations
       
       
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
        
                               __________
                               

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE                    
36-191 PDF                  WASHINGTON : 2019                     
          
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
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         

                BOB CORKER, Tennessee, Chairman        
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho                ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey
MARCO RUBIO, Florida                 BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland
RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin               JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
JEFF FLAKE, Arizona                  CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
CORY GARDNER, Colorado               TOM UDALL, New Mexico
TODD YOUNG, Indiana                  CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, Connecticut
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming               TIM KAINE, Virginia
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia              EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
ROB PORTMAN, Ohio                    JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
RAND PAUL, Kentucky                  CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey


                  Todd Womack, Staff Director        
            Jessica Lewis, Democratic Staff Director        
                    John Dutton, Chief Clerk        

                              (ii)        

  
                          C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

Responses to additional questions from the committee and any 
  additional material submitted for the record are located at the 
  end of each hearing transcript.
                              ----------                              

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2018......................................     1

    Thompson, Col. Andrea L. (USA, Ret.), of South Dakota, 
      nominated to be Under Secretary of State for Arms Control 
      and International Security.................................     6

    Thornton, Susan A., of Maine, nominated to be an Assistant 
      Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs......     9

    Fannon, Francis R., of Virginia, nominated to be an Assistant 
      Secretary of State for Energy Resources....................    12

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2018.......................................    99

    Moley, Hon. Kevin Edward, of Arizona, nominated to be 
      Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization 
      Affairs....................................................   102

    Olsen, Hon. Josephine, of Maryland, nominated to be Director 
      of the Peace Corps.........................................   104

    Bethel, Erik, of Florida, nominated to be U.S. Alternate 
      Executive Director of the International Bank for 
      Reconstruction and Development.............................   122

    Cairncross, Sean, of Minnesota, nominated to be Chief 
      Executive Officer, Millennium Challenge Corporation........   124

THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 2018..........................................   149

    Pence, Robert, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador to the 
      Republic of Finland........................................   152

    Shelton, Dr. Judy, of Virginia, nominated to be U.S. 
      Executive Director of the European Bank for Reconstruction 
      and Development............................................   155

    Traina, Trevor, of California, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Austria....................................   158

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2018.........................................   181

    Bernstein, Robin S., of Florida, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Dominican Republic..................................   188

    Royce, Marie, of California, nominated to be an Assistant 
      Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural Affairs....   191

    Macmanus, Hon. Joseph E., of New York, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Colombia.....................   194

    Prado, Hon. Edward Charles, of Texas, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Argentine Republic.......................   196

                                 (iii)

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 2018........................................   239

    Madison, Kirsten Dawn, of Florida, nominated to be an 
      Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics 
      and Law Enforcement Affairs................................   241

    Hushek, Thomas J., of Wisconsin, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Republic of South Sudan.............................   244
      
THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 2018.........................................NA \1\


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ S.Hrg. 115-339 (https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-
115shrg29844/pdf/CHRG-115shrg29844.pdf)

    Pompeo, Mike, nominated to be U.S. Secretary of State, 
      hearing transcript printed under separate cover............    NA

WEDNESDAY, MAY 9, 2018...........................................   279

    Wolcott, Hon. Jackie, of Virginia, nominated to be a U.S. 
      Representative to the Vienna Office of the U.N, and to be a 
      U.S. Representative to the International Atomic Energy 
      Agency.....................................................   281

    Cohen, Jonathan R., of California, nominated to be the U.S. 
      Deputy Representative to the U.N. on the U.N. Security 
      Counsel and the U.N. General Assembly......................   284

    Cella, Joseph, of Michigan, nominated to be Ambassador to the 
      Republic of the Fiji Islands, The Republic of Kiribati, The 
      Republic of Nauru, The Kingdom of Tonga, and Tuvalu........   287

    Cornstein, David B., of New York, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to Hungary.................................................   290

    Pedrosa, Eliot, of Florida, nominated to be the Alternate 
      Executive Director of the Inter-American Development Bank..   293

TUESDAY, JUNE 5, 2018............................................   335

    Mosbacher, Hon. Georgette, of Florida, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Poland.......................   339

    Akard, Stephen, of Indiana, nominated to be Director of the 
      Office of Foreign Missions.................................   342

    Rosen, Mark, of Connecticut, nominated to be United States 
      Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund for a 
      Term of two years..........................................   344

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 13, 2018.........................................   361

    Mondello, Joseph N., of New York, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.....................   369

    Breier, Kimberly, of Virginia, nominated to be an Assistant 
      Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs..........   372

    George, Hon. Kenneth S., of Texas, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Oriental Republic of Uruguay........................   376

THURSDAY, JUNE 14, 2018..........................................   451

    Harris, Harry B. Jr., of Florida, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Republic of Korea...................................   458

    Nagy, Hon. Tibor Peter, Jr., of Texas, nominated to be an 
      Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs...........   461

    Schenker, David, of New Jersey, nominated to be an Assistant 
      Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs................   464
THURSDAY, JUNE 21, 2018..........................................   541

    Nichols, Hon. Brian A., of Rhode Island, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Zimbabwe.....................   547

    Sondland, Gordon D., of Washington, nominated to be U.S. 
      Representative to the European Union.......................   550

    Gidwitz, Ronald, of Illinois, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Niger......................................   554

    Chalet, Cherith Norman, of New Jersey, nominated to be an 
      Alternate U.S. Representative to the U.N. and a U.S. 
      Representative to the U.N. for Management and Reform.......   557

THURSDAY, JUNE 28, 2018..........................................   599

    Lu, Hon. Donald, of California, to be Ambassador to the 
      Kyrgyz Republic............................................   601

    Berry, Randy W., of Colorado, to be Ambassador to the Federal 
      Democratic Republic of Nepal...............................   605

    Teplitz, Hon. Alaina B., of Colorado, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri 
      Lanka and as Ambassador to the Republic of Maldives........   608

WEDNESDAY, JULY 18, 2018.........................................   635

    Bulatao, Brian J., of Texas, nominated to be an Under 
      Secretary of State for Management..........................   641

    Natali, Denise, of New Jersey, nominated to be an Assistant 
      Secretary of State for Conflict and Stabilization 
      Operations.................................................   645

TUESDAY, JULY 31, 2018...........................................   689

    Tapia, Donald R., of Arizona, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      Jamaica....................................................   693

    Sullivan, Hon. Stephanie S., of Maryland, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Ghana........................   686

    Hammer, Hon. Michael A., of Maryland, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Democratic Republic of the Congo.........   699

    McCarter, Kyle, of Illinois, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Kenya......................................   702

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 1, 2018........................................   757

    Cooper, Major R. Clarke, of Florida, nominated to be an 
      Assistant Secretary of State for Political-Military Affairs   760

    Richmond, John Cotton, of Virginia, nominated to be Director 
      of the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking............   763

THURSDAY, AUGUST 16, 2018 (A.M.).................................   807

    Hale, Hon. David, of New Jersey, nominated to be an Under 
      Secretary of State for Political Affairs...................   810

THURSDAY, AUGUST 16, 2018 (P.M.).................................   877

    Blanchard, Lynda, of Alabama, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Slovenia...................................   880

    Hogan, Dereck J., of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Moldova....................................   883

    Kosnett, Philip, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Kosovo.....................................   886

    Reinke, Judy Rising, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to Montenegro..............................................   889
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 22, 2018.......................................   929

    Williams, Karen L., of Missouri, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Republic of Suriname................................   934

    Palmieri, Francisco Luis, of Connecticut, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Honduras.....................   936

    Sullivan, Kevin K., of Ohio, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Nicaragua..................................   939

THURSDAY, AUGUST 23, 2018........................................   999

    Fischer, David T., of Michigan, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Kingdom of Morocco.....................................  1003

    Miller, Hon. Earl Robert, of Michigan, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the People's Republic of Bangladesh..........  1006

    Rosenblum, Daniel N., of Maryland, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Republic of Uzbekistan..............................  1009

    Tom, Kip, of Indiana, nominated to be U.S. Representative to 
      the United Nations for Agencies for Food and Agriculture...  1013

    Yamamoto, Hon. Donald Y., of Washington, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Somalia..............  1015

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 25, 2018......................................  1067

    Montgomery, Mark, of Virginia, nominated to be an assistant 
      administrator of the U.S. Agency for International 
      Development for Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian 
      Assistance.................................................  1069

    Glick, Bonnie, of Maryland, nominated to be Deputy 
      Administrator of the U.S. Agency for International 
      Development................................................  1073

    Harvey, Michael T., of Texas, nominated to be an assistant 
      administrator of the U.S. Agency for International 
      Development for the Middle East............................  1077

WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 2018....................................  1159

    Cloud, Craig Lewis, of Florida, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Republic of Botswana...................................  1162

    Pelletier, Michael Peter, of Maine, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Madagascar and to the Union 
      of the Comoros.............................................  1164

    Scott, Robert K., of Maryland, Class of Counselor, nominated 
      to be Ambassador to the Republic of Malawi.................  1166

    Tamlyn, Hon. Lucy, of New York, nominated to be Ambassador to 
      the Central African Republic...............................  1168

    Stromayer, Eric William, of Virginia, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Togolese Republic........................  1175

    Hankins, Hon. Dennis B., of Minnesota, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Mali.........................  1177

    Hearne, Dennis Walter, of Virginia, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Mozambique...................  1179

    Henshaw, Simon, of Massachusetts, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to the Republic of Guinea..................................  1182

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2018........................................  1253

    Garber, Hon. Judith G., of Virginia, nominated to be U.S. 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Cyprus.......................  1255

    Gunter, Dr. Jeffrey Ross, of California, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Iceland......................  1258
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 4, 2018--continued

    Litzenberger, Earle D., of Virginia, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to Azerbaijan...................................  1261

    Nelson, Eric George, of Virginia, nominated to be Ambassador 
      to Bosnia and Herzegovina..................................  1265

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 11, 2018.......................................  1309

    Blome, Donald Armin, of Illinois, to be Ambassador to the 
      Republic of Tunisia........................................  1311

    Moser, Hon. William, of North Carolina, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Kazakhstan...................  1313

    Pommersheim, John Mark, of Florida, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Tajikistan...................  1316

WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2018.....................................  1343

    Mahoney, Patricia, of Virginia, to be Ambassador to the 
      Republic of Benin..........................................  1346

    Paschall, Richard Carlton, III, of North Carolina, nominated 
      to be Ambassador to the Republic of the Gambia.............  1349

    Stevenson, Susan N., of Washington, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Equatorial Guinea............  1352

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2018 (A.M.).................................  1385

    Klecheski, Michael S., of New York, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Mongolia.....................  1386

    Matthews, Hon. Matthew John, of Virginia, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to Brunei Darussalam............................  1390

    Murphy, W. Patrick, of Vermont, to be Deputy Ambassador to 
      the Kingdom of Cambodia....................................  1393

TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2018 (P.M.).................................  1439

    Culvahouse, Arthur B., Jr., of Tennessee, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Commonwealth of Australia................  1444

    Perez, Hon. Carol Z., of Virginia, nominated to be Director 
      General of the Foreign service.............................  1447

    Henzel, Christopher Paul, of Virginia, nominated to be 
      Ambassador to the Republic of Yemen........................  1449

    Barsa, John, of Florida, nominated to be an assistant 
      administrator of the U.S. Agency for International 
      Development for Latin America and the Caribbean............  1452

    Lynch, Sarah-Ann, of Maryland, to be Ambassador to the Co-
      Operative Republic of Guyana...............................  1456

    Tracy, Lynne M., of Ohio, nominated to be Ambassador to the 
      Republic of Armenia........................................  1458

APPENDICES.......................................................  1543


    Appendix I.--Nominations Considered by the Committee.........  1544


    Appendix II.--Nominations Withdrawn by the President.........  1550


    Appendix III.--Nominations Returned to the President.........  1550

.                             
                            NOMINATIONS

                              ----------                              


                      THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:06 a.m., in 
Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Bob Corker, 
chairman of the committee, presiding.
    Present: Senators Corker [presiding], Risch, Rubio, 
Johnson, Young, Barrasso, Menendez, Cardin, Shaheen, Murphy, 
Kaine, Markey, and Merkley.
    Also Present: Senator Thune.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB CORKER, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM TENNESSEE

    The Chairman. Foreign Relations committee will come to 
order.
    And we appreciate our distinguished nominees for being here 
and, very importantly, Senator Thune. I do want you to know we 
normally start on time. Today is unusual. I know that Senator 
Menendez had a previous engagement that ran over.
    Today's committee will hold a nomination hearing for three 
very important positions. Our nominees today are Andrea 
Thompson to be Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and 
International Security Affairs; Susan Thornton to be the 
Assistant Secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs; and 
Francis Fannon to be the Assistant Secretary for Energy 
Resources.
    First, however, we have some distinguished guests. I know 
that Senator Gardner is here also to talk about one of the 
nominees, who wished to introduce these nominees. And so, we 
are going to allow them to proceed with their introductions so 
they can leave and do other duties. I know you have got a lot 
going on, both of you.
    Therefore, I am going to postpone my opening comment--and I 
know that Senator Menendez has agreed to do the same--and let 
you go ahead and do your introductions, and then we will begin 
the process in the normal manner.
    So, with that, I would like to introduce the well-known, 
distinguished Senator John Thune of South Dakota.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA

    Senator Thune. Chairman Corker, thank you, Senator 
Menendez, members of the committee. It is a--an honor and a 
privilege to have the opportunity to introduce to the committee 
a distinguished South Dakota native, Colonel Andrea Thompson.
    I often say that South Dakota punches above its weight in 
service to the country. And Andrea is a stellar example of 
that. She is a fifth-generation South Dakotan whose family I 
have known for decades, and she is extremely qualified to serve 
as the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and 
International Security.
    She is currently a senior advisor at the State Department, 
and previously was Deputy Assistant to the President and 
National Security Advisor to the Vice President at the White 
House. Prior to that, she served as the National Security 
Advisor for the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on 
Homeland Security, the Executive Officer to the Under Secretary 
of the Army, and as the Senior Military Advisor to the House of 
Representatives Foreign Affairs committee.
    She is undoubtedly familiar with the numerous challenges 
that Congress and the administration face today, but she is no 
stranger to the frank discussions that must take place to 
ensure that America responds to such threats with clear eyes.
    Andrea gave over 25 years of service to the United States 
Army, including combat deployments to Afghanistan as 
Intelligence Director at Chief of Staff Iraq, as Senior 
Intelligence Officer for Multinational Division North, as well 
as tours in Bosnia, Honduras, Belize, and Germany.
    As the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and 
International Security, she will be tasked with leading the 
State Department's efforts on nonproliferation and verification 
of international agreements. There will be no shortage of 
trials.
    The members of the committee are well aware of the 
challenges the United States faces today, and I have full faith 
that Andrea will continue her exemplary service, if confirmed. 
She will bring with her not only her depth of experience, but a 
humble sense of service that stems from her South Dakota roots.
    Andrea graduated from my graduate school alma mater, the 
University of South Dakota, with honors, and received their 
Alumni Achievement Award in 2011. She went on to earn her 
master of science with honors at Long Island University, and 
master of arts in national security and strategic studies at 
National Defense University.
    But, before she left South Dakota to begin her career of 
service, she was a standout high school and college athlete, 
and even delivered the Argus Leader newspaper for 6 years. She 
is supported by her family back home, as well as her husband, 
David Gillian. And, Mr. Chairman, Andrea Thompson has my vote 
of confidence, as well.
    Thank you for the opportunity to introduce Andrea this 
morning. I urge my colleagues on this committee to see that she 
is quickly confirmed following the hearing today.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Well, thank you very much for being here. And 
you are welcome to go about your duties. You did not mention 
whether you graduated with honors from the same university. 
[Laughter.]
    The Chairman. I assume you did. But, I am----
    Senator Thune. Yeah, thank you for pointing that out, Mr. 
Chairman. [Laughter.]
    The Chairman [continuing]. Yes, sir.
    Senator Gardner.

                STATEMENT OF HON. CORY GARDNER, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM COLORADO

    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And thank you, to the witnesses, for your time and 
testimony today and, more importantly, your service and 
commitment to our country. It is truly appreciated.
    It is my great honor to introduce Frank Fannon for this 
position. I am excited about the work that you will be doing. I 
have known Mr. Fannon--Frank--for a very long time. My time 
started in the office of Senator Wayne Allard, back over 15 
years ago now, and that is where I had the opportunity to meet 
somebody who worked in the office of Senator Ben Nighthorse 
Campbell from Colorado by the name of Frank Fannon. We never 
knew him by ``Francis.'' We did know him by ``Frank.'' And the 
opportunity to work with Frank on a number of issues important 
to Colorado and the West of--every issue from our incredible 
exploration opportunities in Colorado on oil and gas, to Good 
Samaritan legislation that Mr. Fannon worked on, not only in 
Senator Campbell's office, but prior to that, in Pete 
Domenici's office, as well.
    After Senator Campbell's office, had the opportunity to go 
work for the EPW committee, served as counsel at the 
Environment and Public Works committee under our colleague 
Senator Inhofe, was instrumental in the writing and passage of 
the Energy Policy Act of 2005. Then he spent the past several 
years in the private sector, working for a number of 
organizations, from VHP to Murphy to others, where he has 
gained valuable experience on how the policies that he helped 
craft through Senator Domenici's office, Senator Campbell's 
office, and the EPW committee, how that works in the real 
world. And I think that is the kind of experience that we need 
at the State Department when we focus on the energy 
opportunities around the globe and the diplomacy that our 
energy gives us the ability to utilize around the globe, that 
opportunity to flex our American energy independence as it 
relates to our allies from Europe to Asia, and what that can do 
for this country and our diplomatic efforts and our economic 
growth.
    So, it is a great honor, again, to be with Mr. Fannon and 
the nominees here today. I strongly support the nomination of 
Frank Fannon. I hope the rest of you will, as well. And it is 
just good to see him grow up and do good things.
    The Chairman. Well, it is good to see you grow up and do 
good things, too. [Laughter.]
    The Chairman. Today, we will consider the nominations of 
three distinguished individuals, as we have said, to serve our 
Nation at the State Department, each in an essential role.
    Andrea L. Thompson, the nominee for Under Secretary of 
State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, 
joined the Army after graduating from the University of South 
Dakota in 1988, and attained the rank of colonel before 
retiring in 2016. She served in military intelligence with 
deployments to Iraq, Afghanistan, and Bosnia, and most recently 
served as National Security Advisor to the Vice President. The 
Under Secretary for State--of State for Arms Control supervises 
the bureaus tasked with guaranteeing compliance with 
international arms treaties, licensing arms sales to other 
countries, and monitoring nuclear nonproliferation around the 
globe. At a time when the Syrian regime uses chemical weapons 
against its own people, and the Russian President, Vladimir 
Putin, fails to comply with the INF Treaty, we need an Under 
Secretary at the helm to ensure verification of 
nonproliferation agreements, lead civilian nuclear cooperation 
efforts, and monitor rogue actors.
    One such rogue actor is North Korea. Addressing this threat 
is one of the Trump administration's top priorities, and the 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs Bureau is at the forefront of 
implementing this administration's maximum pressure and 
engagement strategy.
    Ms. Susan Thornton, a career Foreign Service Officer, is 
the nominee to be Assistant Secretary for the EAP Bureau. 
Having served recently as the Acting Secretary, I know that Ms. 
Thornton is very well aware of a vast range of political and 
economic and security issues affecting U.S. national interests 
in the Asia Pacific.
    In addition, given her experience serving in Beijing, I 
know that Ms. Thornton recognizes that no country looms larger 
in the region, nor stands to have a bigger impact on U.S. 
national interests in the coming years, than China. While 
engagement with Beijing poses significant challenges, Ms. 
Thornton also will be tasked with efforts to strengthen U.S. 
relations with critical allies and partners in the region, 
including Japan and Vietnam.
    Our third nominee today is Frank Fannon, who has been 
nominated to be Assistant Secretary for Energy Resources. This 
bureau is responsible for policy development and implementation 
with respect to U.S. international security, energy security. 
Energy plays such an important role in our economy, and our 
national security depends on ensuring access to abundant, 
reliable, and affordable energy. With his extensive background 
working with the Senate Energy committee and working for 
various private-sector firms in the energy sector, Mr. Fannon 
is well qualified for this position.
    Today's nominees seek to take on responsibilities that are 
crucial to our national security on so many fronts around the 
world. We thank all of you for your willingness to be here, to 
serve our Nation in this regard. And look forward to your 
testimony.
    With that, I would like to turn to our distinguished 
Ranking Member, Bob Menendez.

              STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT MENENDEZ, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

    Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this 
hearing today.
    Before I comment on our witnesses, I need to comment on the 
administration's proposed foreign affairs budget for fiscal 
year '19, because, honestly, I find it to be stunningly 
irresponsible. A budget is a reflection of our priorities and 
our values, and an opportunity to commit resources to 
fulfilling a mission. It is often said, ``If you show me your 
budget, I will tell you our strategy.'' Well, if that is true, 
then the administration has a very bad strategy. Far from 
putting America first, the Trump administration's budget would 
put America last. This request would slash almost 30 percent of 
the FY17 enacted levels, undermining our leadership on a global 
stage and our ability to effectively serve the American people 
and promote our national security interests.
    Furthermore, the request runs counter to the very goals and 
ideals the administration seeks to champion, and those defined 
in its own National Security Strategy, which calls for robust 
diplomatic engagement and maintaining our position of global 
leadership.
    So, as you said, Mr. Chairman, last year we largely 
rejected that last budget. I think this one needs to be 
rejected, as well. And I will look forward to working with you 
and colleagues on the Appropriations committee to provide 
adequate funding for our diplomats, development officers, and 
front-line civilians working to promote American national 
security.
    Let me thank our nominees for their willingness to serve. 
And, in particular, I want to recognize the many years that 
Colonel Thompson and Ms. Thornton have spent in public service. 
For decades, one of the core objectives of U.S. foreign policy 
has been to limit, as much as possible, the spread of nuclear, 
biological, and chemical weapons. The success of our 
nonproliferation efforts has always depended upon gaining the 
cooperation of other states to legally binding treaties and 
agreements, U.N. Security Council resolutions, and bilateral 
cooperative efforts. We need effective United States leadership 
that inspires and encourages others to join us to meet these 
threats with a united coalition.
    Additionally, Colonel Thompson, if you are confirmed, your 
role as Under Secretary will put you in a unique position to 
strengthen State's ability to provide our allies and partners 
robust and effective security assistance while also ensuring 
that human rights and the protection of civilians are taken 
into account when providing such assistance.
    Ms. Thornton, in nominating you to serve as the Assistant 
Secretary for East Asia and the Pacific, it is my hope this 
means the President intends to listen to knowledgeable and 
sound advice on our policy towards the Asia-Pacific region. As 
a Pacific nation ourself, our national security policy must 
recognize that much of America's 21st-century political and 
economic future lies in the Asia-Pacific region, and it is 
imperative that we engage with the region, not pull away from 
it.
    Yet, the administration talks about the importance of a 
free and open Indo-Pacific region. His actions speak 
differently. While the administration talks about the 
importance of our alliances and partnerships, his actions call 
our commitments into question. The administration talks about 
how our principles are embedded in our policy, but it--actions 
undermines our values. And, while the administration talks 
about the challenge of a revisionist China, its actions seek to 
risk ceding the region to a strategic rival.
    The United States needs to have a strategic and values-
driven presence in the region that includes our military and 
the full range of American diplomatic tools and resources. Such 
an approach is necessary to deal with the wide range of 
challenges, including the crisis of a nuclear-armed North 
Korea, making clear our commitments to our allies and managing 
our relationship with China.
    Finally, any policy for a free and open Indo-Pacific region 
must have human rights and democracy at its core. For too long 
in the region, the United States has treated human rights as 
desirable, but dispensable. Instead, we should be using our 
values as a source of strength and comparative advantage over 
illiberal forces in the region.
    Mr. Fannon, I want to thank you for your--meeting with me 
in my office yesterday. I appreciate your willingness to serve. 
But, given the focus of your career, I want to explore some of 
the concerns that I expressed to you yesterday. You have been a 
forceful advocate for the fossil fuel and extractive 
industries, so I want to know how you will execute ENR's core 
objectives, which includes, quote, ``advising on energy issues 
as they related to, among others, pursuit of alternative energy 
and energy efficiency and greater transparency and 
accountability in the energy sector.'' I look forward to 
continuing to explore that conversation with you.
    Mr. Chairman, I have to--we are having a major debate and 
vote on the floor on DREAMers, and I am going to have to go for 
a few minutes to that. I have read all of the testimony, and I 
have read all the witnesses. I intend to be back for the 
questions, but I am going to have to excuse myself for a few 
minutes.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Absolutely.
    So, with that, if you would, if you could take about 5 
minutes to give an--some opening statements, there will be 
questions. And if you would do so in the order introduced, we 
would appreciate it. Again, thank you for being here.

STATEMENT OF COLONEL ANDREA L. THOMPSON, USA, RETIRED, OF SOUTH 
DAKOTA, NOMINEE TO BE UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ARMS CONTROL 
                   AND INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

    Colonel Thompson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member 
Menendez, and distinguished members of this committee. It is an 
honor to be with you here today as President Trump's nominee 
for Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International 
Security. I am humbled by this opportunity, with your approval, 
to serve in the administration and work with you, the White 
House, Secretary Tillerson, and the dedicated professionals of 
the State Department.
    I would like to take this opportunity to thank some very 
important people in my life. I am joined today by my incredible 
husband, David Gillian, and many dear friends. Thank you for 
your love and support.
    I would also like to thank my parents, Phil and Georgia 
Hanson, who are watching at home in South Dakota, and a special 
hello to my mother-in-law, Meg Gillian, and my grandfather, 
Dean Nelson, who is 92 years young.
    Finally, I would like to send recognition to my family and 
friends who could not be here today but have served as role 
models and mentors throughout my life. I am a proud South 
Dakotan, and it is the values and work ethic of those that I 
grew up with that always showed me what right looks like.
    I would also like to thank Senator Thune for his kind words 
and appreciation for representation of our great State.
    I had the privilege of serving this administration before 
as Vice President Pence's National Security Advisor. During my 
tenure, I worked with the NSC, members and staff of Congress, 
leaders across the Departments of State, Defense, Treasury, 
Commerce, and Energy, to name just a few. However, my 
background in international security and the importance of 
those relationships began years before, during my 28-year 
career as a military officer. From leading troops in Iraq, 
Afghanistan, Bosnia, Germany, Central America, and other 
locations across the globe, I saw firsthand the importance of 
relationships with our allies and partners, and the critical 
need for a strong and steadfast security structure. I have seen 
both the successes and failures of our arms-control policy. I 
have been on the receiving end when diplomacy fails. If 
confirmed, I commit to you that I will always place the safety 
and security of the American people first.
    I am also fully cognizant of the profound responsibilities 
of senior leadership. During my military service and in the 
private sector, leadership was my legacy. Bringing people 
together with different strengths and viewpoints to work 
towards a common goal is an exciting challenge. The State 
Department's arms control and international security team of 
over 600 talented men and women are committed to advancing our 
U.S. policies and protecting its people. They are the backbone 
of our Nation's most important policy decisions, negotiations, 
and treaties. These professionals cover arms control and 
international security issues, nonproliferation matters, 
including missile, nuclear, chemical, biological, and 
conventional weapons proliferation, export control policies, 
and foreign assistance programs, all of which are of vital 
national security interest to the United States.
    I am excited about the opportunity to lead this team, if 
confirmed. I also look forward to working with my colleagues at 
the State Department, other U.S. Government agencies, Congress, 
and our international community.
    This administration has clearly set a high priority for our 
nuclear posture, arms control, nonproliferation, and political/
military policies. The President and Vice President's 
commitment in these areas has been, and will remain, steadfast.
    The recent review of our nuclear and missile defense 
postures offer critical opportunities to outline the vision of 
how this administration will work to ensure our security in the 
face of the world's most destructive weapons. If confirmed, I 
look forward to regularly consulting and engaging our allies 
and partners both at home and abroad on these important 
deterrence, strategic stability, and defense issues.
    The threat of WMD proliferation continues, and the role of 
the United States and its leadership to counter that threat 
remain as great as ever. By continuing to work with our allies 
and the international community, we send a clear message to 
those who violate U.N. Security Council resolutions, 
established treaties and agreements. We must continue to put 
maximum pressure on those regimes through diplomatic and 
economic sanctions, including robust implementation of U.S. 
sanctions legislation. Along with our partners and allies, we 
must continue to improve upon our capabilities, strengthen our 
resolve, and force these regimes to change their behavior. Much 
has been done, but there is much more to do. As our enemies 
adapt and technologies evolve, so must we. I appreciate the 
work that has been done by this committee. And, if confirmed, I 
welcome the opportunity to collaborate with all of you in that 
endeavor.
    As one of its first legislative decisions over two 
centuries ago, our Congress prescribed an oath establishing a 
bond between the people of this great Nation and those who have 
committed themselves to service to the American people. I first 
took this oath 30 years ago. This is the same oath that you 
have taken. It would be my highest honor to again serve the 
American people and support and defend the Constitution of the 
United States.
    Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and members of this 
committee, I am honored to be considered for this critical 
appointment. Thank you for the opportunity to appear before 
you. I welcome your comments and your questions.
    Thank you.
    [Colonel Thompson's prepared statement follows:]


                Prepared Statement of Andrea L. Thompson

    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Menendez, distinguished members of the 
committee, it is an honor to be with you today as President Trump's 
nominee for Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International 
Security. I am humbled by this opportunity--with your approval--to 
serve in the administration and work with you, the White House, 
Secretary Tillerson and the dedicated professionals at the State 
Department.
    I would like to take this opportunity to thank some very important 
people in my life. I'm joined today by my incredible husband, David 
Gillian, and many dear friends. Thank you for your love and support. 
I'd also like to thank my parents who are watching at home in South 
Dakota, and a special hello to my mother-in-law, Meg Gillian, and my 
grandfather, Dean Nelson, who's 92 years young. Finally, I'd like to 
send recognition to my family and friends who couldn't be here today 
but have served as role models and mentors throughout my life. I'm a 
proud South Dakotan and it's the values and work ethic of those I grew 
up with that always showed me what right looks like. Thank you Senator 
Thune for your kind words and your representation for our great state.
    I had the privilege of serving this administration before, as Vice 
President Pence's National Security Advisor. During my tenure, I worked 
with the NSC, members and staff of Congress, leaders across the 
Departments of State, Defense, Treasury, Commerce and Energy to name 
just a few. However my background in international security and the 
importance of those relationships began years before during my 28 year 
career as a military officer. From leading troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, 
Bosnia, Germany, Central America, and other locations across the globe, 
I saw firsthand the importance of relationships with our allies and 
partners and the critical need for a strong and steadfast security 
structure. I've seen both the successes and failures of our arms 
control policies. I've been on the receiving end when diplomacy fails. 
If confirmed, I commit to you that I will always place the safety and 
security of the American people first.
    I am also fully cognizant of the profound responsibilities of 
senior leadership. During my military service and in the private 
sector, leadership was my legacy. Bringing people together, with 
different strengths and viewpoints, to work towards a common goal is an 
exciting challenge. The State Department's Arms Control and 
International Security team of over 600 talented men and women are 
committed to advancing our U.S. policies and protecting its people. 
They are the backbone of our Nation's most important policy decisions, 
negotiations and treaties. These professionals cover arms control and 
international security issues, nonproliferation matters, including 
missile, nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional weapons 
proliferation, export control policies, and foreign assistance 
programs. All of which are of vital national security interest to the 
United States. I am excited about the opportunity to lead this team, if 
confirmed. I also look forward to working with my colleagues at the 
State Department, other U.S. Government agencies, Congress and our 
international community.
    The administration has clearly set a high priority for our nuclear 
posture, arms control, nonproliferation and political-military 
policies. The President and Vice President's commitment in these areas 
has been and will remain steadfast. The recent review of our nuclear 
and missile defense postures offer critical opportunities to outline 
the vision of how this administration will work to ensure our security 
in the face of the world's most destructive weapons. If confirmed, I 
look forward to regularly consulting and engaging our allies and 
partners both at home and abroad on these important deterrence, 
strategic stability, and defense issues.
    The threat of WMD proliferation continues, and the role of the 
United States and its leadership to counter that threat remain as great 
as ever. By continuing to work with our allies and the international 
community, we send a clear message to those who violate U.N. Security 
Council resolutions, established treaties and agreements. We must 
continue to put maximum pressure on those regimes through diplomatic 
and economic sanctions, including robust implementation of U.S. 
sanctions legislation.
    Along with our partners and allies, we must continue to improve 
upon our capabilities, strengthen our resolve, and force these regimes 
to change their behavior.
    Much has been done but there is much more to do. As our enemies 
adapt and technologies evolve, so must we. I appreciate the work that's 
been done by this committee and if confirmed, I welcome the opportunity 
to collaborate with all of you in that endeavor.
    As one of its first legislative decisions over two centuries ago, 
our Congress prescribed an oath, establishing a bond between the people 
of this great Nation and those who have committed themselves to service 
to the American people. I first took this oath 30 years ago. The same 
oath all of you have taken. It would be my highest honor to again serve 
the American people, and support and defend the Constitution of the 
United States. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member and members of the 
committee, I am honored to be considered for this critical appointment. 
Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today. I welcome 
your comments and questions.


    The Chairman. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Thornton.

 STATEMENT OF SUSAN A. THORNTON, OF MAINE, A CAREER MEMBER OF 
   THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, 
 NOMINEE TO BE AN ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EAST ASIAN 
                      AND PACIFIC AFFAIRS

    Ms. Thornton. Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Menendez, and 
members of the committee, it is my great honor to appear here 
today as the President's nominee to serve as Assistant 
Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs.
    I have been privileged to serve this great country of ours 
and to have worked with so many dedicated and talented public 
servants over the course of my Foreign Service career. I would 
like to thank the President and Secretary Tillerson for placing 
their trust and confidence in me. If confirmed, I pledge to 
this committee that I will devote my full energies to advancing 
America's interests in the East Asia-Pacific region.
    I would like to take the opportunity here to thank my 
family: my husband, Joe, and daughter, Kate, who are here with 
me today; my two older children, Ben and Anne, who both went to 
three different high schools as we moved around from place to 
place; and my mom and dad. They have been an incredible support 
network for me, and have all sacrificed a lot to get me here. I 
want to express my profound gratitude to all of them.
    I joined the United States Foreign Service more than 25 
years ago now, and have served five different administrations 
in postings from Beijing to Moscow, Ashgabat to Chengdu, and, 
of course, in Washington. I have worked on issues from 
nonproliferation to trade agreements to human rights and many 
other important issues. I have never ceased to appreciate how 
lucky I am to have this wonderful career.
    Several of my former colleagues in this position have 
reached out to me in recent weeks to make sure that I knew that 
this was the best job in the world. And I am certainly honored 
and humbled to have the prospect of joining their company, if 
confirmed.
    There is no part of the world that will be more 
consequential for our children's future than the Asia-Pacific 
region. With one-third of the world's population, one-third of 
the global GDP, and some of the largest and most dynamic 
economies in the world, it is clear that the Asia-Pacific will 
be key to America's future well-being and our prosperity. We 
exported over $400 billion in goods to EAP countries in 2017, 
which is up 160 percent from a decade ago.
    This region is also home to five U.S. treaty allies with 
over 80,000 U.S. troops living, training, and operating 
alongside their partner host-country forces to undertake a 
range of missions, from counterterrorism to search-and-rescue 
to disaster relief, and others. It is crucial for U.S. 
interests that this area remains stable and prosperous.
    But, there are very real security and economic challenges 
in the Asia-Pacific region, including the menacing threat of 
North Korea, of course, the rise of an authoritarian China, and 
the spread of terrorism and extremism. Backsliding on 
democracy, governance, corruption, and human rights is also 
undermining prospects for stability and growth in some 
countries.
    Dealing effectively with these challenges in this crucial 
part of the world requires the strength and resolve of U.S. 
diplomatic leadership. And this administration's approach to 
the Asia-Pacific puts our strong and active leadership at the 
forefront of international efforts to meet these challenges.
    On North Korea, the Trump administration has mobilized the 
entire international community through our campaign of global 
maximum pressure to come together to face down Kim Jong Un's 
attempts to develop his nuclear and ballistic missile 
capabilities. The U.N. Security Council unanimously passed four 
sanctions resolutions last year, and additional worldwide 
efforts to further isolate North Korea diplomatically and 
economically make clear that we will not accept a nuclear North 
Korea. Our preference is to achieve denuclearization of the 
Korean Peninsula through a diplomatic settlement, but we will 
reach this goal, one way or another.
    With regards to China, as this administration has made 
clear, the United States wants a productive relationship with 
China, and we must work to manage and resolve differences. We 
have been equally clear, however, that we will not abide 
Chinese attempts to displace the United States in Asia, to 
coerce countries in the region, and that we will not be taken 
advantage of. If the international system that has enabled 
China's rise is to continue, then rules and standards must be 
observed, and countries must not be bullied or threatened, but 
treated as equal players.
    The administration, under President Trump's leadership, is 
working to also expand and deepen partnerships throughout the 
region via our Indo-Pacific strategy. We also continue to 
prioritize work in APEC to promote high standards, fair trade, 
and to support ASEAN-centered regional architecture, which 
underpins East Asian peace and security. The United States is a 
Pacific power, and will remain committed to this region's 
success.
    In short, I am humbled to be considered for this important 
position, and, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you 
to further the prospects of the United States in this part of 
the world.
    Thank you very much.
    [Ms. Thornton's prepared statement follows:]


                  Prepared Statement of Susan Thornton

    Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Menendez, members of the committee, 
it is my great honor to appear here today as the President's nominee to 
serve as Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific 
Affairs. I have been privileged to serve this great country of ours, 
and to have worked with so many dedicated and talented public servants 
over the course of my Foreign Service career. I would like to thank the 
President and Secretary Tillerson for placing their trust and 
confidence in me. If confirmed, I pledge to this committee that I will 
devote my full energies to advancing America's interest in the East 
Asia-Pacific region.
    I'd like to take this chance to thank my family, my husband Joe and 
daughter Kate, who are here today, my two older children Ben and Anne, 
who both went to three different high schools as we moved from place to 
place, and my Mom and Dad. They have been an incredible support network 
and have all sacrificed a lot to get me here. I want to express my 
profound gratitude to all of them.
    I joined the United States Foreign Service more than 25 years ago 
now, and have served five different administrations in postings from 
Beijing to Moscow, Ashgabat to Chengdu, and of course Washington. I 
have worked on issues from non-proliferation to trade agreements to 
human rights, and many important issues in between and have never 
ceased to reflect on how lucky I am to have this wonderful career. 
Several of my former colleagues in this position have reached out to me 
in recent months and all wanted to make sure I knew that this is the 
best job in the world. I am certainly honored and humbled to have the 
prospect of joining their company, if confirmed.
    There is no part of the world that will be more consequential for 
our children's future than the Asia-Pacific. With one-third of the 
world's population, one-third of global GDP, and some of the largest 
and most dynamic economies in the world, it is clear that the Asia-
Pacific region will be key to America's future well-being and 
prosperity. We exported over $400 billion in goods to EAP countries in 
2017, which is up 160 percent from a decade ago. This region is also 
home to five U.S. treaty allies with over 80,000 U.S. troops living, 
training, and operating alongside their partner host country forces to 
undertake a range of missions, including search and rescue, disaster 
relief, and counterterrorism. It is crucial for U.S. interests that 
this area remains stable and prosperous.
    But there are very real security and economic challenges in the 
Asia-Pacific region, including the menacing threat of North Korea, the 
rise of an authoritarian China, and the spread of terrorism and 
extremism. Although the region has enjoyed peace and growing prosperity 
for years, the threat from North Korea continues to increase, tensions 
and extremism are on the rise, and the export-led model that 
underpinned East Asia's stunning growth is no longer viable. We must 
insist on fair and reciprocal market access, if we are to sustain the 
global trading system. Backsliding on democracy, governance and 
corruption, and human rights is also undermining prospects for 
stability and growth in some countries.
    Dealing effectively with these challenges in this crucial part of 
the world requires the strength and resolve of U.S. diplomatic 
leadership, and this administration's approach to the Asia-Pacific puts 
our strong and active leadership at the forefront of international 
efforts to meet these challenges.
    On North Korea, the Trump administration has mobilized the entire 
international community, through our campaign of global maximum 
pressure, to come together to face down Kim Jong Un's attempts to 
develop his nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. The U.N. 
Security Council unanimously passed four sanctions resolutions last 
year, and additional worldwide efforts to further isolate North Korea 
diplomatically and economically make clear that we will not accept a 
nuclear North Korea. Our preference is to achieve denuclearization of 
the Korean Peninsula through a diplomatic settlement, but we will reach 
this goal one way or another.
    With regards to China, as this administration has made clear, the 
United States wants a productive relationship with China, and we must 
work to manage and resolve differences. We have been equally clear, 
however, that we will not abide Chinese attempts to displace the United 
States in Asia, to coerce countries in the region and that we will not 
be taken advantage of. If the international system that has enabled 
China's rise is to continue, then rules and standards must be observed 
and countries must not be bullied or threatened, but treated as equal 
players.
    The administration, under President Trump's leadership, is working 
to expand and deepen partnerships throughout the region via our Indo-
Pacific strategy, to ensure that countries have support to make their 
own decisions and don't feel pressured to take on obligations that 
undermine good governance or long-term growth. We also continue to 
prioritize work in APEC to promote high-standards and fair trade and to 
support ASEAN-centered regional architecture, which underpins East 
Asian peace and security. The United States is a Pacific power and will 
remain committed to this region's success.
    In short, I am humbled to be considered for this important position 
and, if confirmed, I look forward to working with you to further the 
prospects of the United States in this part of the world. Thank you 
very much.


    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Mr. Fannon.

 STATEMENT OF FRANCIS R. FANNON, OF VIRGINIA, NOMINEE TO BE AN 
       ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ENERGY RESOURCES

    Mr. Fannon. Thank you, Senator Gardner, for your gracious 
introduction.
    Chairman Corker and distinguished members of the committee, 
I am honored to appear before you as the President's nominee to 
serve as Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources. I 
am thankful to President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for the 
confidence they have placed in me to undertake this critical 
role.
    I am proud that members of my family join me today. I would 
like to introduce my wife, Mercer, whose partnership and 
support are foundational to any success in career and life I 
have--may have been fortunate enough to achieve. I am also 
delighted that my two eldest daughters, Madeline and Charlotte, 
are here today, and suspect that our 23-month-old, Phoebe, is 
watching from home with my mother-in-law, Marsha Planting.
    I would like to acknowledge my parents, Frank and Susana 
Fannon, who are watching the live stream. Through their 
sacrifices, they taught me that the American Dream is very much 
alive, that, with dedication and effort, anyone can achieve 
great things, and that success is not determined from where you 
are from, but where you choose to go.
    My grandparents' mother and her sisters immigrated to the 
United States from Argentina in 1969. They left everything 
behind, in hopes to realize a better life, an aspirational life 
that only America could offer. My personal family history and 
experience have shaped me in many ways, and gave me a personal 
appreciation for other cultures and nations.
    I came to Washington without contacts or a job, but with 
the unwavering desire to serve. After working for the late 
Senator Domenici and home State Senator Ben Nighthorse 
Campbell, I realized my greatest professional privilege, until 
this day, to serve as Energy Counsel to the Senate Committee on 
Environment and Public Works. While at EPW, I helped the 
committee with energy issues and drafted provisions of the 
bipartisan Energy Policy Act of 2005. That legislation helped 
to unleash American innovation, and set the conditions for 
today's energy abundance.
    Thanks to our resource wealth, American energy plays an 
ever more vital role in American diplomacy. The U.S. can more 
freely confront oppressive and illegitimate regimes now that 
American production buffers global markets against supply 
shocks. And American energy and technology strengthens the 
economies of partners who share our values.
    In the private sector, I sought to leverage that abundance 
to advance American values in sustainable operations across 
five continents. I worked with and led cross-functional, 
globally located, and culturally diverse teams. I saw firsthand 
how energy and resource projects can catalyze development, and 
the benefits of constructive government engagement.
    In this capacity, I worked with the Department on multiple 
energy projects, and can attest that its dedicated foreign and 
civil service experts serve the country with great distinction. 
Given the rapidly changing energy landscape, the dynamic 
foreign policy environment, and the way in which energy 
overlaps with foreign policy, it is critical to have a strong, 
informed, and enabled energy bureau, or ENR.
    If confirmed, I hope to work with the committee by focusing 
on three objectives: energy security through diplomacy, 
governance, and electricity for all.
    Secretary Tillerson has stated that enhancing energy 
security by ensuring access to affordable, reliable, diverse, 
and secure supplies of energy is fundamental to national 
security. ENR is uniquely positioned to lead American 
diplomatic energy security interests, in coordination with 
other agencies. If confirmed, I pledge to promote energy 
diplomacy as a means to foster collaboration among nations and 
oppose the weaponization of energy for geopolitical ends.
    Developing countries may have considerable resource 
endowments, but lack institutional frameworks and transparent 
rule of law. U.S. companies often view these aboveground 
conditions as prohibitive risk profiles. Yet, they also make 
them prime targets for state-owned enterprises hostile to 
liberal democratic values. ENR's governance programs and--
support transparency reforms, reduce potential for 
exploitation, and advance U.S. energy security objectives.
    According to the International Energy Agency, 1.2 billion 
people lack access to electricity, and 2.7 billion lack clean 
cooking facilities. Energy poverty are development and 
geopolitical security challenges. A country's inability to 
provide reliable electricity is indicative of broader capacity 
limitations and a precursor to domestic unrest. If confirmed, I 
look forward to identifying ways that the Bureau can build and 
broaden its work in this area.
    Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, thank you for the 
opportunity to be here today. I look forward to your questions.
    [Mr. Fannon's prepared statement follows:]

                Prepared Statement of Francis R. Fannon

    Thank you, Senator Gardner for your gracious introduction.
    Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Menendez, and distinguished members 
of the committee, I am honored to appear before you as the President's 
nominee to serve as Assistant Secretary of State for Energy Resources. 
I am thankful to President Trump and Secretary Tillerson for the 
confidence they have placed in me to undertake this critical role.
    I am proud that members of my family joined me today. I would like 
to introduce my wife, Mercer, whose partnership and support are 
foundational to any success in career and life I have been fortunate 
enough to achieve. I am delighted that my two eldest daughters, 
Madeline and Charlotte, are here today, and suspect that our 23-month-
old, Phoebe, is watching from home with my mother-in-law, Marsha 
Planting. Seated next to Mercer are my aunt and uncle, Isabel and 
Richard Lynch.
    I would like to acknowledge my parents, Frank and Susana Fannon who 
are watching the livestream. Through their sacrifices, they taught me 
that the American dream is very much alive. That with dedication and 
effort, anyone can achieve great things, and that success is not 
determined by where you are from, but where you choose to go.
    My grandparents, mother, and her sisters immigrated to the United 
States from Argentina in 1969. They left everything behind in hopes to 
realize a better life, an aspirational life that only America could 
offer. My personal family history and experience have shaped me in many 
ways and gave me a personal appreciation for other cultures and 
nations.
    I came to Washington without contacts or a job, but with the 
unwavering desire to serve. After working for the late Senator Pete V. 
Domenici and home state Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, I realized my 
greatest professional privilege until this day, to serve as energy 
counsel to the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works. While at 
EPW I helped the committee with energy issues and drafted key 
provisions of the bipartisan Energy Policy Act of 2005. That 
legislation helped to unleash American innovation and set the 
conditions for today's energy abundance.
    Thanks to our resource wealth, American energy plays an ever more 
vital role in American diplomacy. The U.S. can more freely confront 
oppressive and illegitimate regimes now that American production 
buffers global markets against supply shocks, and American energy and 
technology strengthens the economies of partners who share our values.
    In the private sector, I sought to leverage that abundance to 
advance American values and sustainable operations across five 
continents. I worked with and led cross-functional, globally located, 
and culturally diverse teams. I saw firsthand how energy and resource 
projects can catalyze development, and the benefits of constructive 
government engagement.
    In this capacity, I worked with the Department on multiple energy 
projects, and can attest that its dedicated foreign and civil service 
experts serve the country with great distinction. Given the rapidly 
changing energy landscape, the dynamic foreign policy environment, and 
the way in which energy overlaps with foreign policy, it is critical to 
have a strong, informed and enabled Energy Bureau or ENR.
    If confirmed, I hope to work with the Committee on by focusing on 
three objectives--Energy Security through Diplomacy, Governance, and 
Electricity for All.
    Secretary Tillerson has stated that ``enhancing energy security by 
ensuring access to affordable, reliable, diverse, and secure supplies 
of energy is fundamental to national security objectives.'' ENR is 
uniquely positioned to lead American diplomatic energy security 
interests, in coordination with other agencies. If confirmed, I pledge 
to promote energy diplomacy as a means to foster collaboration among 
nations and oppose the weaponization of energy for geopolitical ends.
    Developing countries may have considerable resource endowments, but 
lack institutional frameworks and transparent rule of law. U.S. 
companies often view these above-ground conditions as prohibitive risk 
profiles. Yet, they are prime targets for state-owned enterprises 
hostile to liberal democratic values. ENR's governance programs can 
support transparency reforms, reduce potential for exploitation, and 
advance U.S. energy security objectives.
    According to the International Energy Agency, 1.2 billion people 
lack access to electricity and 2.7 billion lack clean cooking 
facilities. Energy poverty are development and geopolitical security 
challenges. A country's inability to provide reliable electricity is 
indicative of broader capacity limitations, and a precursor to domestic 
unrest. If confirmed, I look forward to identifying ways that the 
Bureau can build and broaden its work in this area.
    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and members of the committee, thank 
you for the opportunity to be here today. I look forward to your 
questions.


    The Chairman. Thank you.
    I typically defer. I may ask one question of Susan 
Thornton. I know we had a nice meeting last night, and I 
appreciate you coming by so late.
    I had a debrief, I guess, with Senator Menendez a couple of 
days ago, from Vice President Pence relative to some of the 
discussions that took place in South Korea. It is my sense that 
the South Koreans, the Japanese, and others are joined at the 
hip with us as it relates to North Korea. It is my sense that 
we are certainly open to having meetings with North Korea, as 
long as the subject matter is one thing, and that is the 
denuclearization of the Peninsula, period. And it is my 
understanding that, while discussions like that may take place 
at some point in the future, it will take place on the basis 
that we are going to continue to clamp down, working with 
others, to isolate them even further, put tougher sanctions in 
place, that there will be no reprieve to have a discussion.
    I am wondering if you would verify that to be your 
thinking, and what to do add to that in any regard.
    Ms. Thornton. Thank you very much, Senator. And thank you 
very much for the meeting that we had yesterday.
    I think that the policy that we have in place, that was put 
in place at the very beginning of the administration, the 
maximum global pressure campaign that envisions increasing 
pressure through an international coalition in order to change 
the calculus of the North Korean regime, is still very much in 
place. We have built a very solid international coalition, in 
lockstep with our allies and partners. We have brought onboard 
many countries in the world that would not normally be at the 
center of this effort. And we are continuing to do that. We 
envision the pressure continuing to ramp up. There will not be 
any letup on pressure. We are leaving the door open to 
engagement, as you have rightly stated, and we want that 
engagement to consist of one issue, which is denuclearization, 
our overarching goal for this policy.
    The Chairman. Tell me what it is--why is it that you think 
we have been able to put together this coalition of people to 
put the most pressure ever on North Korea right now?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, I think there are two aspects to that. 
One is that the threat from North Korea through the testing 
that the Kim Jong Un regime has done has become much more 
urgent and much more serious. And I think the other issue is 
the administration's resolve, frankly, and determination to 
increase the pressure, tap every possible outlet for putting 
that pressure on, and for putting a lot of diplomatic shoe 
leather into gathering this coalition. We are sending people to 
all corners of the globe to talk to governments about what they 
can do to further squeeze the North Korean regime, 
diplomatically and economically, and isolate them.
    The Chairman. And I want to reserve the rest of my time, 
but who is it that is leading the coordination of this effort? 
Who is the, sort of, center driving force of this coordinated 
effort?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, we have a very clearly coordinated 
interagency policy committee working on the overall North Korea 
policy, which generated the March 2017 review and policy that 
we are following. The State Department is leading the 
diplomatic effort to undertake maximum global pressure 
campaign, but it is complemented by efforts from our DOD 
colleagues, from our intelligence colleagues, and a lot of 
other people around the U.S. Government.
    The Chairman. Senator Cardin.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I thank all three of our nominees for their willingness to 
serve their country.
    Ms. Thornton, I think the Assistant Secretary for East 
Asian and Pacific is a dream job, so I am glad that you had 
that enthusiasm. And your service to our country--career 
service--is very much noted. It gives you, though, the 
responsibility to coordinate our policies in that region. And I 
want to just focus, for one moment, on your commitment on human 
rights.
    East Asia and Pacific has significant challenges in good 
governance, human rights, corruption, trafficking, you name it. 
And, on the bilateral relationships at the missions, a lot of 
times these issues get sort of pushed to the side because of 
the urgency of a particular security issue at the time. And it 
is the responsibility of the position you have been nominated 
to to make sure they never forget the values that this Nation 
stands for.
    So, in North Korea, yes, the nuclear confrontation is our 
challenge, but you have a country that is at the bottom on 
human rights. In China, you have a country that made some 
progress, is now moving in the wrong direction on protecting 
the human rights of its citizens. In Burma, it has exploded 
into a full-out crisis with the Rohingya Muslims. Lives are 
in--at risk. And then, our traditional allies, the Philippines 
has--you have seen where the extrajudicial killings have taken 
place.
    So, will you just reaffirm to this committee your 
commitment that human rights will be the priority, and that you 
will, in your contact with each of our missions in--under your 
supervision, remind them that you expect progress to be made on 
the human rights front, and share that information with this 
committee?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
    But, yes, I think that, certainly, standing up for 
democracy, human rights, clean governance is part of who we 
are. It is part of our foreign policy, an integral part. And I 
think it needs to be part of every conversation that we have 
with governments around the world, whether it is on 
nonproliferation, energy issues, or trade issues. Human rights 
come into everything that the United States does with partner 
governments overseas. And I think--I will certainly commit to 
you that that will be a standard that I will bear, and that I 
will continue to communicate with the committee on this.
    Senator Cardin. And one area you could specifically help us 
with is that--I have been in communication with our Ambassadors 
or Chief of Missions of all the countries, asking them to reply 
to a commitment they made during their nomination process, to 
keep this committee informed on their human rights agenda. My 
understanding is that sometimes those letters have a long way 
of getting to me, because they are in the bureaucracy of the 
State Department. Will you make sure that we get timely 
responses to those inquiries?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you.
    Ms. Thompson, there are a lot of questions I am going to--I 
would like to ask you about. Let me just go to the basics. Let 
us start with civil nuclear--123 agreements, gold standards. 
Are you committed to maintaining the gold standard, wherever we 
can, in any future 123 agreements?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you, Senator. And thank you for 
making the time last week for our office call.
    I commit to you that I will always represent, in 
negotiations for the United States, the highest standard 
possible for the safety and security, first and foremost, for 
the American people, but to get the highest standard possible. 
I think the community recognizes that the agreement with the 
UAE is set as a gold standard, and would look to achieve that 
standard. Again, I--there are ongoing dialogues that I have not 
been privy to, but once--if confirmed, once fully briefed, I 
will look forward to continue that dialogue with you, with this 
committee, to ensure we get the highest standard possible.
    Senator Cardin. In our conversation, I appreciated that we 
covered a lot of issues, including INF and the New START. And 
just to put on the record, assuming Russia is in compliance 
with the New START agreements, it is--are we committed to 
making sure the United States also complies and stays in the 
New START agreement?
    Colonel Thompson. We are, sir. It was a very positive sign 
last week, with both parties making the central limits to the 
New START Agreement. We have a few years to assess for the 
extent with that, but a very promising sign, based on last 
week. It still needs final verification, but I look forward to 
continuing to see the progress of that treaty, and, if 
confirmed, will continue to uphold those standards.
    Senator Cardin. Mr. Fannon, I want to, first, thank you for 
your support of 1504 and the communication with the SEC in 
regards to transparency within the extractive industries. We 
very much appreciated your leadership on that issue.
    As I understand it, you recognize the threat of foreign 
interest on energy. We just issued a report on Russia using 
energy as a weapon of war. The Nord Stream 2--I do not know if 
we have official position opposing it, but we would expect that 
that is a major area where we could minimize Russia's impact by 
opposing a Nord Stream 2. Do you agree?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator. In fact, my understanding is, 
Secretary Tillerson has publicly raised his--voiced his strong 
opposition to Nord Stream 2. And, if confirmed, I would 
continue to advance alternate ways to lessen the 
vulnerabilities that Europe has from the Russian gas 
dependence.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Senator Gardner.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And again, thanks to all of you for your service.
    Ms. Thornton, thank you very much for the time yesterday to 
have a conversation about goals and objectives in Asia. We have 
been, as we talked about--Senator Markey and I are working on 
the North Korea issues, developing a comprehensive Asia 
strategy, something that would focus on three things: economic 
strategy in Asia, a national security strategy in Asia, and a 
rule-of-law strategy in Asia. More than just a 4-year or 8-year 
outlook of any presidency, it is important that we have a long-
term strategy in the United States that gives us a generational 
view in Asia.
    As you mentioned, a third, a third, a third--GDP, 
population--but soon to have one-half of global GDP, one-half 
of global population, five of the seven defense treaties, so--
and largest armies--and some of the largest standing armies in 
the world all concentrated in Asia. So, we have got to get this 
right.
    Do you believe it is important that we have a long-term 
Asia strategy?
    Ms. Thornton. Thank you, Senator. And thank you, again, for 
the time yesterday.
    Yeah, I think it is--it is important that we keep in mind 
our long-term interests. They are certainly enduring. And I 
think we need to have a strategy that matches that. I think 
that the President's Indo-Pacific strategy that was announced 
in November in Da Nang, Vietnam, is looking at all of the 
issues, the pillars that you just mentioned on diplomatic and 
political, on security, and on economic, and also on the rule 
of law and governance issues. So, I think it is very critical 
that we keep in mind what our long-term goals are, and adjust 
our strategy----
    Senator Gardner. Thanks. And will you commit me--with--
commit to me to work with us on this strategy and this 
legislation?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you.
    Turning to North Korea, the goal of complete verifiable, 
irreversible denuclearization remains the absolute commitment 
of this administration. Is that correct?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes.
    Senator Gardner. There is no other strategy or device, 
other than, right now, our application of maximum pressure, 
both economically and diplomatically, correct?
    Ms. Thornton. Correct.
    Senator Gardner. Would you continue to work with me, this 
committee, and Senator Markey on sanctions legislation to make 
sure that we apply that maximum pressure?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to work with you 
on all of that.
    Senator Gardner. And I hope that you will continue to 
support appropriate sanctions on, not only North Korean 
entities, but also third-party entities that are enabling and 
empowering the North Korean regime, including those out of 
China?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you.
    And, when it comes to China, the National Security Strategy 
states--just released--``China and Russia challenge American 
power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American 
security and prosperity. China seeks to displace the United 
States in the Indo-Pacific region, expand the reaches of its 
state-driven economic model, and reorder the region in its 
favor. China is using economic inducements and penalties, 
influence, operations, and implied military threats to persuade 
other states to heed its political and security agenda.'' Do 
you agree with those statements?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes.
    Senator Gardner. What policy should the United States 
pursue to counter China's role in the Indo-Pacific region?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, I think we have to, first and foremost, 
deepen and expand our partnerships and our alliances in the 
region, and do, in some form or other, similar to what we are 
doing in the case of North Korea, which is, bring together 
like-minded countries to promote the rules-based order, to push 
back on bad behavior, and to insist that countries in the 
region avoid and refrain from coercive tactics, bullying, and 
that they abide by a regime where all countries have an equal 
say in their decisionmaking.
    Senator Gardner. Do you believe China will continue its 
efforts to militarize the South China Sea?
    Ms. Thornton. I think they will try.
    Senator Gardner. And what is our response appropriately to 
be?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, I think we need to use all tools that 
we have at our disposal. We have diplomatic tools at our 
disposal. We are using our freedom-of-navigation operations to 
push back on excessive maritime claims in the region. And we 
are also, you know, using our coalitions and support of 
partners in the region to push back against Chinese behavior.
    Senator Gardner. And, during your time in the Foreign 
Service, which developments in the U.S.-China relationship have 
you seen that have most disappointed you?
    Ms. Thornton. I think that, in the U.S.-China relationship, 
there has been, you know, a lot of hope placed in the reform 
process in China. So, I think it is quite disappointing to see 
the backsliding on reforms, both economic and also the--
certainly the political atmosphere in China tightening, and 
repression for individual freedoms increasing in recent years.
    Senator Gardner. And you do--do you believe, right now, 
that the United States is doing enough to pressure China on 
behavior ranging from continued cyberintrusions of U.S. 
corporations to violations of human rights to militarization 
through its expansion--expansive activities, the One Belt, One 
Road?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, I think we are doing a lot to push back 
on all of that, but I think we are looking at doing more. And I 
think that is appropriate.
    Senator Gardner. What does a ``free and open Indo-Pacific'' 
mean to you?
    Ms. Thornton. To me, that means open access for--to global 
commons for all countries, open, sort of, trade and trade 
lanes, and a continuation of rules-based systems that allow all 
countries to participate on an equal footing in that region.
    Senator Gardner. Thanks.
    Mr. Chairman, thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you very much.
    Senator Merkley.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    And let me begin with Mr. Fannon. Welcome. And Germany is 
considering a massive LNG project, called Nord Stream, that 
would essentially make Germany's economy dependent on Russia 
for its--sizable share of its energy for the generation to 
come. Do we have strategic concerns about that type of 
dependence?
    Mr. Fannon. Thank you for the question, Senator. And thank 
you for taking the time to visit with me yesterday.
    Absolutely. My understanding, the U.S. has publicly opposed 
it. Secretary Tillerson has opposed it repeatedly. It 
highlights the dependency on--of Europe on--further 
vulnerability on Russian gas. And the United States position 
is--my understanding, is strongly to oppose that pipeline.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you. Thank you very much.
    And, Ms. Thompson, in August of last year, President Moon 
Jae-in said the U.S. has agreed not to take any military action 
against North Korea without first getting South Korea's 
approval. And General Dunford responded that South Korea is an 
ally, and everything we do in the region is in the context of 
our alliance. Will we pay significant attention to South 
Korea's position in regards to potential military strikes on 
North Korea?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you for that question, Senator. And 
thank you for making the time yesterday.
    I think, particularly in the region, we have strengthened 
our relationships with--this administration--with visits from 
the Secretary of Defense Tillerson, the President, the Vice 
President. But, the short answer is yes. It is critical that we 
have our allies and partners, whether it is Japan, South Korea, 
strengthening the relationships with China, to----
    Senator Merkley. Thank you. I will just take yes. You had 
me at yes.
    Colonel Thompson. Okay, sir. Thank----
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    So, our administration is considering a 123 agreement with 
Saudi Arabia that would not have the gold standard on 
nonproliferation, which is prohibiting uranium enrichment and 
plutonium reprocessing. Of course, the goal is not to create 
the foundation for the potential for a nuclear weapons program. 
We have, in the course--the largest Shi'ite power, Iran, and 
the largest Sunni power, of Saudi Arabia. We have been doing 
everything we can to have Iran not pursue a nuclear weapons 
program. Should we allow Saudi Arabia to proceed with American 
technology in nuclear power plants that do not have the gold 
standard, given the risk of creating that competition between 
the two and undermining our own efforts to prevent Iran from 
getting a nuclear bomb?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    And I know the talks are ongoing. I have not been privy to 
those talks. And I know the talks predated this particular 
administration. But, it is my goal that--to have the 
nonproliferation standards possible, briefly addressed earlier, 
with the earlier UAE, with the gold standard. And, if 
confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee and 
with the interagency to ensure that we get the strongest 
standards possible for that agreement.
    Senator Merkley. Does it give you any concern, though, 
that, if we have standards for Saudi Arabia, that Iran, as the 
competing Shi'ite power, will say, ``Well, you are not treating 
the two of us equally,'' and make it harder for us to pursue a 
no-nuclear-weapon policy? We did ask Iran and--as part of the 
agreement, to dismantle their Iraq reactor, pour concrete in 
the core, and so on, so forth.
    Colonel Thompson. Senator, I can commit to you that I will 
work to achieve the highest standard achievable. Again, I 
have--do not know what agreements have been--occurred in the 
past, but I can tell you and commit to you that I will work for 
our country to get the strongest standards achievable.
    Senator Merkley. Back in 2003, we negotiated an agreement 
with Libya to surrender, discontinue all elements of its 
nuclear weapon development program. What confidence would North 
Korea's Kim regime have that a similar decision to denuclearize 
would not result in the same fate as befell Gaddafi?
    Colonel Thompson. Well, I have not, you know, met the 
leader, but I would not wager to get what is in his mind. What 
I can say is that the maximum pressure campaign from this 
administration has taken steps to put pressure on the regime. 
We have seen some movement. And, obviously, as the Assistant 
Secretary mentioned, with the relationship with China, been 
cutting down the financial footholds. I do not know the 
relationships--if we can--with the North Korean regime, I do 
not know if he parallels any other regime, sir, quite candidly.
    Senator Merkley. All the experts in the region, when we 
visited there, noted that North Korea paid a lot of attention 
to what happened with Gaddafi. So, I am just asking you if that 
is--with your background in national security, if that was a 
real concern in the message that was sent through that action, 
in terms of our efforts to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula.
    Colonel Thompson. Yes, sir, it is absolutely a data point.
    Senator Merkley. Yeah.
    In our--did I run out of time already?
    The Chairman. You did.
    Senator Merkley. How did that----
    The Chairman. It is just been----
    Senator Merkley. How did that happen?
    Thank you.
    The Chairman. Thank you so much.
    Senator Young.
    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Chairman.
    Congratulations to each of you for your nominations. Thank 
you for visiting with me in my office. And I appreciate your 
previous history of service.
    President Trump, Mr. Fannon, said, in November of last 
year, that economic security is national security. Do you agree 
with this?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Young. Okay. Do you believe energy security is an 
integral component of economic security?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Young. And so, my inference would be that you also 
agree that energy security is a necessary and important part of 
our national security.
    Mr. Fannon. I do.
    Senator Young. Okay. When it comes to the economic and 
energy security of this country, do you agree that the actions 
and priorities of the Bureau of Energy and Natural Resources 
can be optimized if they are carried out in support of a 
written strategic plan for the Bureau?
    Mr. Fannon. Senator, thank you for the question.
    Senator Young. This question should not come as a surprise, 
because we discussed it in my office.
    Mr. Fannon. Absolutely. I think that--I would just point 
out that the foundation would be the National Security 
Strategy, which speaks to this very issue. I think, from our 
conversation, you raised the point, ``How can we delineate that 
with a little bit more granularity and have more measurable 
outcomes? And I think that there is--if confirmed, I would like 
to work with you on how just to do that.
    Senator Young. So, based on your preparation for this 
hearing, does--do you know whether ENR periodically produces 
some sort of written strategy?
    Mr. Fannon. I do not, Senator.
    Senator Young. Well, you were not aware of one when we 
previously discussed it. So, if confirmed, will you provide my 
office a copy of a written strategy?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator. It would be my intention to 
help--if confirmed, to work with the Bureau and other partners 
to come up with something that would achieve that goal.
    Senator Young. Okay. A written strategy. It is important to 
me.
    Mr. Fannon. I understand, Senator, yes.
    Senator Young. Okay. Thank you.
    Ms. Thompson, if confirmed, I understand you will lead the 
interagency policy related to arms transfers and security 
assistance. Do you agree that the U.S. Government should fully 
comply with all laws related to security assistance?
    Colonel Thompson. I do, Senator.
    Senator Young. And, during our meeting yesterday, we 
discussed the potential need to update and refine some of those 
laws. So, if confirmed, do you and your team commit to working 
closely with me and members of my team to determine whether we 
can improve U.S. laws related to security assistance?
    Colonel Thompson. Absolutely, Senator.
    Senator Young. All right, thank you.
    In the Senate Intel committee's hearing this week on 
worldwide threats, our Director of National Intelligence, Dan 
Coates, a Hoosier, reiterated that Iran has the largest 
ballistic missile program in the Middle East. He warned that 
Iran may develop an ICBM that could strike the United States. 
He noted Iran's space program could shorten Tehran's path to an 
ICBM. The intel community has consistently warned that Tehran 
would choose ballistic missiles as its preferred method of 
delivering nuclear weapons if it acquired them.
    Ms. Thompson, do you agree with these DNI Coates and intel 
community assessments?
    Colonel Thompson. Yes, sir, I do.
    Senator Young. I would also note a January 25 report by the 
Foundation for Defense of Democracies that documented as many 
as 23 ballistic missile launches by Iran just since the 
conclusion of the July 2015 Iran deal. Based on these concerns, 
on February 6, Senator Rubio joined me in leading a letter to 
our President regarding Iran's ballistic missile program. Our 
letter was signed by 14 United States Senators.
    Mr. Chairman, with unanimous consent, I would like to enter 
that letter into the record.
    The Chairman. Without objection.


    [The information referred to above is located at the end of 
this transcript.]


    Senator Young. Ms. Thompson, have you had a chance to 
review our letter?
    Colonel Thompson. I did, Senator, thank you.
    Senator Young. Well, then you will know our letter calls 
for tough additional sanctions against Iran, and expresses a 
desire to work with the administration. So, if confirmed, will 
you work with my office and this committee to determine what 
additional sanctions we might impose on Iran to counter its 
ballistic missile program?
    Colonel Thompson. If confirmed, I commit that I will work 
with you and this committee, absolutely, Senator.
    Senator Young. Absolutely. Thank you.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Absolutely. Thank you, sir.
    Senator Shaheen.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    And congratulations, to each of you, on your nominations. I 
look forward to working with you, if confirmed.
    Can I ask, Ms. Thornton--I had a briefing, with some other 
Senators yesterday, with someone from the White House who made 
it very clear that there is no ''bloody-nose strategy`` for a 
strike against North Korea. And I--and we asked him if we could 
go out and quote him on that, and said yes. Is it your 
understanding, as well, that there is no ''bloody-nose 
strategy`` against North Korea?
    Ms. Thornton. That is my understanding, Senator, yes.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    How concerned are you that we do not yet have an Ambassador 
in South Korea, given the challenges we are facing on the 
Korean Peninsula? And what--can you describe what that means, 
in terms of our diplomacy in that area?
    Ms. Thornton. Thank you.
    Well, of course, as a career diplomat, I am very well aware 
of the importance of having a representative of the President 
that is confirmed on the ground to represent us in all 
countries, but especially in South Korea. And I know that our 
team is working very hard with the White House on a nomination 
for our Ambassador in South Korea.
    I do want to point out, though, that we do have a 
tremendous team at the Embassy in South Korea, and a very, very 
capable charge d'affaires out there, Mark Knapper, who has been 
doing an incredible job over the last almost year.
    Senator Shaheen. I certainly would second that. I think we 
have very impressive diplomats in our embassies. But, it does 
send a message to the country where--to South Korea and to 
other countries in the region about how we view the importance, 
I think. I heard from a German official, recently, who was 
expressing concern that we do not yet have an Ambassador to 
Germany, either, and that that sends a message. So, I do hope 
that you will do everything you can to expedite and move this 
process along, because we should not be a full year into a new 
administration and not have an Ambassador in a country that is 
so critical to foreign policy in that region.
    Can I ask, Mr. Fannon--you spoke to, I believe it was 
Senator Cardin's questions about Nord Stream 2 and sanctions. 
As I am sure you are aware, the sanctions act, CAATSA, that we 
passed last year would authorize sanctions against energy 
projects that Russia is engaged in that involve a certain level 
of their participation. So far, no sanctions have been imposed 
to date. What we have heard from the State Department 
spokesperson is that we do not need to impose sanctions under 
CAATSA--I am paraphrasing, here--that just the threat is a 
deterrence. Do you believe that to be the case with energy 
projects? And are there any examples that you can provide?
    Mr. Fannon. Apologies, Senator, but in--with respect to the 
question, is it directed to the CAATSA, in particular?
    Senator Shaheen. It is. Are there any sanctions that you 
think should be applied under CAATSA relative to Russia's 
energy projects?
    Mr. Fannon. Thank you for the clarification, Senator.
    I--I have not been briefed on these issues substantively, 
being outside of the Department and given the security issues 
at play. I am aware of----
    Senator Shaheen. But, you were able to comment on Nord 
Stream 2. Is that--would you put that in a different category 
than other projects?
    Mr. Fannon. Well, with respect to that, Nord Stream 2, I 
was referring to the Secretary's public comments on that 
matter. With respect to CAATSA, I am aware of the legislation 
that passed with overwhelming support. I am aware that the 
Department intends to apply pressure to change Russia's 
behavior. And, if confirmed, I will pledge to work with the 
committee and throughout the interagency to do just that.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    Colonel Thompson, in response to Russia's violations of the 
INF Treaty, the administration has decided to initiate U.S. 
research and development on ground-based cruise missiles that 
would not be treaty-compliant. As I understand, this step would 
not violate the INF Treaty, but would set us on a different 
course. Do you believe that beginning R&D on this type of 
missile will have any impact on Russia? Will they be willing to 
come back into compliance if we begin to do this kind of 
research? And are there any risks that you see in this 
approach?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    I think it is important that the U.S. maintain our 
compliance with the treaty. As--have not been fully briefed, 
but look forward to receiving, if confirmed, those briefings. 
My understanding is that the R---as you mentioned, that the R&D 
does not violate that treaty. I think it is important, as an 
old soldier and as, hopefully, a, if confirmed, future Under 
Secretary, that we continue to conduct those R&D efforts. Those 
are--some of those are very long--long-term projects, and we 
would not want to get flatfooted.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you. Thank you very much.
    Senator Risch.
    Senator Risch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    First of all, I want to thank Senator Shaheen for bringing 
up the, quote, ''bloody-nose strategy.`` I was in the same 
meeting she was in yesterday, and all of us have been shaking 
our heads. The national media did what it always does, and they 
have reported that the President has been advised on this, and 
this is one of the options that we have. And we were told 
clearly by administration people--it is about as high up as it 
gets--that there is no such thing as a ''bloody-nose 
strategy,`` that they have never talked about it, they have 
never considered it, they have never used that term, and it is 
not something that people ought to be talking about. So, thank 
you, Senator Shaheen, for bringing that up. And this is a good 
hearing, actually, to do that in. And, obviously, I mean, that 
thing has repercussions that one cannot even imagine. So, it is 
a good thing that that has never been talked about.
    However, talking about the North Korea strategy, Ms. 
Thornton, I--the Chairman asked you a question; I did not quite 
get an answer to that. And he asked about, Who is the 
responsible person? Obviously, it is the President of the 
United States. But, you mentioned--I think his specific 
question was, Who is steering the boat on this right now? Who 
is the person steering the boat on this right now? And you 
mentioned the March 17th committee that came up with a 
strategy. And I guess I--can you give us a little more direct--
do we need to talk to Secretary Tillerson if--if we are looking 
for the nuance sentence that has to be put on the table, is it 
Secretary Tillerson that we talk to?
    I thought the Vice President did a fabulous job, when he 
went to South Korea, of laying out exactly what is on America's 
mind when it comes to North Korea. And words matter. And things 
have got to be nuanced right, particularly in this situation.
    Who is the person that the Chairman was seeking to 
identify? Is that you? Is it the Secretary of State?
    Ms. Thornton. Well----
    Senator Risch. Obviously, the President, but----
    Ms. Thornton. Yeah. I mean, obviously, this is a whole-of-
government effort. It comes from the President, but certainly 
the Secretary of State has been in the lead on all of the 
diplomatic efforts to build this global coalition of maximum 
pressure. We held a meeting of a number of foreign ministers in 
Vancouver recently, where we expanded that coalition very 
meaningfully, I think. And so, we are following the Secretary's 
direction; and our Bureau, I think, for the State Department, 
is in the lead on this effort, but we make use of colleagues 
across the Department and across the interagency of the U.S. 
Government to help us with that.
    Senator Risch. Okay, thank you.
    Ms. Thompson, the 123 agreements, there are a lot of us 
here that are big fans of the 123 agreements, for lots and lots 
of different reasons. I hope you will commit to continue to 
pursue them, whenever possible. If a country does not come to 
us, they are going to go somewhere else to--probably an 
adversary--well, not necessarily an adversary, but--well, you 
know, it could be an adversary. And that is not in our best 
interest. You onboard with the 123s? Are you--you feel good 
about those?
    Colonel Thompson. I echo those sentiments, Senator.
    Senator Risch. Okay, thank you very much.
    Japan's agreement is up in 2018. Are you--has that--where 
is that right now? Are you engaged in that yet, or not?
    Colonel Thompson. No, Senator, I have not been engaged with 
that. If confirmed, that would be part of my portfolio.
    Senator Risch. Have you been briefed on it as----
    Colonel Thompson. No, sir.
    Senator Risch. Okay. Thank you very much.
    The treaties we have, the arms control treaties that we 
have, all of us have been sometimes preoccupied with cheating 
on those treaties. I led the fight against other New START 
Agreement, which I lost on the floor. And I would like to have 
that vote again. I think maybe the vote would be a little 
different today than it was then. And cheating was a huge issue 
at that point. The other treaties that we have--obviously, in 
this setting--nonclassified setting, we cannot talk about 
exactly what that--what constitutes--or what has been going on, 
as far as the cheating is concerned.
    We have had Secretary of State sitting in the chair you are 
sitting in, and went over this with him. And he wrung his hands 
and talked about how bad it was and how terrible it was, and we 
cannot put up with it. But, it kept happening. And we really 
did not do anything much about that. What are your thoughts on 
that? Where do you come from when we catch somebody cheating? 
And obviously, we cannot deal with everyone, because it would 
release methods and sources that we cannot disclose. What are 
your thoughts on what you are going to do when you find out 
that these people are cheating?
    Colonel Thompson. Well, thank you for that question, 
Senator.
    I think success will lie in a number of areas. One, I have 
confidence on our intelligence community as we continue to 
build that out----
    Senator Risch. As do I.
    Colonel Thompson:--the eyes and ears on our adversaries and 
when they are not abiding by the rules. I also have great 
confidence in our allies and partners. I think it is important 
that we have--we strengthen those existing relationships and 
reach out to those that are looking towards the West, and build 
upon that. I think that is going to be our success as a--to use 
a military term, a ''combat multiplier`` if we get additional 
countries assisting with that and putting pressure on their end 
so it is not a unilateral United States action.
    Senator Risch. My time is up. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    I had about a minute and a half of time, before I turn to 
Senator Menendez, from my first questioning period.
    To New START, just--Ms. Thompson, I mean, it seems to me 
that the START Treaty has actually achieved the desired goals 
that were laid out. Would you agree or disagree with that?
    Colonel Thompson. I would agree with that, Senator.
    The Chairman. So, we have basically caused both of our 
countries to reduce the amount of warheads and delivery 
systems, which, in our case, has allowed us to save monies to 
invest in modernization to make sure that the nuclear warheads 
and delivery systems that we have actually work, versus having 
a huge inventory of them, not knowing whether they can be 
delivered or not, at huge expense. It has allowed us to focus 
ourselves in a much better way. Is that correct?
    Colonel Thompson. That is correct. Thank you.
    The Chairman. And, so far, has the other party adhered, 
generally, to this agreement? Not INF, but to the START Treaty 
itself?
    Colonel Thompson. As I understand--I have not received 
classified updates, and I know, just from open source, that 
reported that they have.
    The Chairman. Senator Menendez.
    Senator Menendez. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
    Ms. Thornton, our National Security Strategy defines China 
as a rival and a revisionist power. It lays out that China and 
Russia challenge American power, influence, and interests, 
attempting to erode American security and prosperity. And I am 
reading directly from the strategy. Given this assessment, how 
should U.S. diplomacy towards China be revised compared to 
prior administrations who looked to build on the cooperative 
elements of our relationship with China as a partner, and to 
encourage China to be a responsible stakeholder, and also as a 
way of addressing the competitive aspects of our relationship?
    Ms. Thornton. Thank you very much, Senator, for that 
question, which is a big question.
    I think, you know, what we have seen in recent years is a--
is that we have moved to an inflection point in our 
relationship with China. And the National Security Strategy 
reflects, I think, that realization, where we need to preserve 
space to cooperate with China. It is the biggest country in the 
world, second-largest economy in the world, and we have a whole 
range of issues that we need to deal with them on--permanent 
member of the U.N. Security Council, et cetera. But, the--this 
National Security Strategy reflects the realization that we are 
also going to have to compete in a lot of areas with a China 
that is growing in power, both economic, military, and 
diplomatic. And----
    Senator Menendez. So, what do we--I appreciate that--what 
do we specifically--what would be--if you are confirmed, what 
would be your advocacy of how we change our policy?
    Ms. Thornton. So, I think--well, we need to, first of all, 
make sure that we are working with other partners in the region 
who are also coming to the same realization, which they are, 
continue to push back on bad behavior, call out, use the tools 
that are at our disposal, whether they be trade remedies, 
sanctions, other tools, and also just diplomatic engagement, I 
think is quite effective with China. China wants to have a good 
relationship with the United States, which is something that, 
you know, gives us entree to deal with them on a diplomatic 
level on many of these issues, and we--they also care a lot 
about their standing in the world. And so, working together 
with other countries and----
    Senator Menendez. Well----
    Ms. Thornton.--partners to push back on bad behavior----
    Senator Menendez. Let me ask you some----
    Ms. Thornton.--call out----
    Senator Menendez. Let me ask you some specifics. So, do you 
believe that China is doing all that it should be doing to help 
us meet the challenge of North Korea?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, I think China is doing a lot to help us 
meet the challenge of North Korea.
    Senator Menendez. Is it doing----
    Ms. Thornton. I do not think they are doing----
    Senator Menendez.--all that it should be doing?
    Ms. Thornton.--everything that they could be doing. And we 
are continuing to work with them to push----
    Senator Menendez. So, if we want to get China to do more, 
and we wanted to change its calibration as to how it is 
thinking about North Korea, should we consider naming China a 
currency manipulator? Should we consider sanctioning Chinese 
banks that are facilitating North Korean transactions? Should 
we be reviewing our One China policy? How do we get China's 
focus and calibration to change?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, I think what we have to do is 
prioritize and go after the issues that we are focused on with 
regard to China, which, in the administration's current 
approach, is North Korea, trade and economic relations, and 
also some law enforcement cooperation on things like opioids, 
et cetera. And I think, you know, we can work with China on 
North Korean issues. We certainly need to continue to press for 
sanctions on entities that are end-running the U.N. sanctions 
regime--and we will do that, as I mentioned to Senator Gardner 
earlier--but also continue to work with them, because they are 
the most important player in implementing those sanctions and 
making the difference in ratcheting up the pressure in North 
Korea.
    On other issues, trade and economic issues, we need to use 
the trade tools that we have at our disposal. We are preparing 
a host of measures, and we are continuing to engage with the 
Chinese to let them know the areas where we see backsliding, 
where we feel agreements have not been observed, and go after 
those, either--hopefully, through diplomatic engagement; if 
not, through----
    Senator Menendez. All right, thank you.
    Ms. Thompson, let me ask you. The START Treaty, in 2021, 
can be extended for 5 years. If circumstances surrounding the 
treaty remain the same, which right now we have compliance, and 
even in the midst of malign activities, like Ukraine's 
cyberattacks during our elections, noncompliance with the INF, 
the one positive area is New START--would you be a proponent of 
extending the treaty for 5 years?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    I honestly think it is too soon to tell. Much changes in 
our world over the course of days and weeks, much less years. I 
can commit to you that I will always stand up for----
    Senator Menendez. What would have to change? If 
everything--if Russia is obeying, and we are obeying, and we 
are living under the treaty, what would change, in your mind, 
that would want us to break away from that?
    Colonel Thompson. There may be other situations in the 
globe that--associated with Russia--I would say, you know, 
Syria is an example, maybe others--where it would be a tool in 
our diplomatic toolkit that we might want to use to get an 
agreement in another area associated with Russia.
    Senator Menendez. Well, I have several other questions, 
but, in deference to our colleagues, I will wait until the----
    The Chairman. Thank you, sir.
    Senator Rubio.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Thank you all for being here.
    Ms. Thornton, there was an article, I have here, on October 
22nd in the Wall Street Journal of last year, and it says that 
FBI agents, in May of last year, were prepared to arrest or 
detain four officials from China's Ministry of State Security, 
which is the equivalent of our CIA, for conducting illegal 
official business while traveling through the U.S. on transit 
visas. These officials had traveled to New York City to 
pressure Guo Wengui, a health--a wealthy Chinese businessman 
who applied for asylum in the United States, to return to China 
and stop using social media to accuse Chinese officials and 
tycoons of corruption. The article goes on to say that, while 
FBI agents were at the airport and prepared to arrest or detain 
these officials before they departed to China, they could not 
secure final signoff from Washington. According to this 
article, some senior administrative officials described you and 
some of your colleagues as not supporting this FBI operation 
and, quote, ''improperly hindering law enforcement efforts to 
address China's repeated violations of U.S. sovereignty and 
law,`` end quote. Is it true that you opposed that arrest?
    Ms. Thornton. I am not sure that I was involved in that 
decisionmaking process, but I do know that it was an 
interagency decision and that there were interagency meetings 
on this issue that came to the conclusion.
    Senator Rubio. Do you recall being involved in the 
interagency decisions?
    Ms. Thornton. I do not.
    Senator Rubio. So, you--your testimony today is that this 
article, and the claim about you, in particular, being involved 
in this decisionmaking, is false, that you did not, as the 
article says, hinder law enforcement efforts to arrest them. 
The FBI had a recommendation to arrest them, and your testimony 
is that you did not hinder that.
    Ms. Thornton. I was not involved in those meetings. I know 
that there were interagency meetings, and that it was the 
decision of the interagency to not arrest them.
    Senator Rubio. So, you were not involved in any of the--
just to--I want to be clear--you were not involved in any of 
the discussions, interagency meetings. You had nothing to do 
with the decision by this--by anyone in Washington to ask the 
FBI not to arrest them. You had nothing to do with that 
decision.
    Ms. Thornton. I mean, I was aware of the conversations that 
were going on at the time and after the fact.
    Senator Rubio. But, you did not weigh in.
    Ms. Thornton. I did not weigh in.
    Senator Rubio. Okay.
    I want to ask you another question. There is this--and 
just, again, because you are acting in this capacity already, 
and you have been involved in these efforts for a long time--
this is the Web site of the State Department. I had a chart, 
but I did not put it up. With your permission, I just want to 
hold up this paper. It used to have the flag of Taiwan in the 
Web site, and no longer has the Taiwanese flag. Do you know how 
that happened? Are you aware of how that decision was made to 
take it down?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes, I am aware. The Consular Affairs Bureau 
rolled out a new Web site for travel advisories that was done 
through a contract and was not seen by our office. And 
following the publication--we do not recognize, of course, 
Taiwan as an independent country, and we do not recognize the 
flag of the ROC as a country where we have official relations. 
And our policy is to not display the flag of the ROC on U.S. 
official government Web sites.
    Senator Rubio. That is a new policy, because it was on 
there before.
    Ms. Thornton. No, this is a new--I believe it is a new Web 
site. But, we--our--it is not a new----
    Senator Rubio. I am sorry. It is a new contractor, not----
    Ms. Thornton.--it is not a new policy.
    Senator Rubio.--a new Web site. This is----
    Ms. Thornton. Sorry.
    Senator Rubio. The old Web site has the flag. The new one 
does not. So, it is not an old Web site, it is an--might be a 
new contractor that designed the Web site, is what you are 
saying.
    Ms. Thornton. I am not sure what specific site that is, 
but----
    Senator Rubio. www.state.gov. That cannot----
    Ms. Thornton. But--I mean, I am just saying that it is not 
a new policy not to display the flag.
    Senator Rubio. Well, the flag is here, so was that just a 
blip or something? I guess it was--somebody inadvertently put 
it in, and you guys took it out. The bottom line is, this is 
the way it is going to stay; we are not going to--we used to 
have the flag; it is not going to be on there anymore. There 
was a change. There is no doubt there was a change. The Web 
sites--the graphics are identical. Someone took down the flag.
    Well, on a policy note with regards to that, let me ask you 
this. Would--do you--would you commit to encouraging high-level 
visits between senior U.S. Government officials to meet with 
Taiwanese counterparts in Taipei?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, Senator, we have a very robust 
unofficial relationship with Taiwan that is grounded in our 
longtime policy based on those three joint communiques and, of 
course, our commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act, which 
are very important. And we have frequent exchange with people 
on Taiwan. And I think that--I certainly support continuing 
that robust unofficial relationship.
    Senator Rubio. But, what about having high-level visits 
between U.S. Government officials to meet with their 
counterparts in Taipei?
    Ms. Thornton. We have ongoing, as I say, visits by all 
realm of people from the U.S. visiting Taiwan, and we certainly 
continue to support that interaction.
    Senator Rubio. Okay.
    The Chairman. Senator Kaine.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    And thanks, to the witnesses, for your service, and 
congratulations on your nominations.
    A question, first, for Ms. Thornton and Ms. Thompson. Two 
days ago, the DNI, Dan Coates, appeared before the Senate 
Intelligence committee, and he testified, quote, ''North Korea 
will be the most volatile and confrontational WMD threat in the 
coming year. In addition to its ballistic missile tests and 
growing number of nuclear warheads for these missiles, North 
Korea will continue its longstanding chemical and biological 
warfare programs also.`` Do you both agree with that assessment 
of DNI Coates?
    Colonel Thompson. I do agree with the Director, sir.
    Ms. Thornton. Yes, sir.
    Senator Kaine. Do you also agree with the stated position 
of Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, and others, that, 
while the U.S. needs to maintain all its options to do with 
this threat, we are a diplomacy-first nation and are going to 
look for a diplomatic resolution that would stop the North 
Korean ambitions to get nuclear weapons or have them be able to 
be deployed against the United States or allies?
    Colonel Thompson. I do agree with the Secretary, yes, sir.
    Senator Kaine. So, whatever the percentage chance that we 
would assess to finding a diplomatic resolution with North 
Korea, that is something that we need to try.
    If I can move now just directly to Ms. Thompson. In the 
same hearing--because this is now not in Ms. Thornton's area of 
the world--in the same hearing, the DNI went on to say, 
''Iran's implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of 
Action, the JCPOA, has extended the time it would take to 
develop a nuclear weapon from several months to about a year, 
provided Iran continues to adhere to the deals of major 
provisions.`` Do you agree with that assessment?
    Colonel Thompson. I do, sir.
    Senator Kaine. Secretaries Tillerson and Mattis have stated 
before this committee and the Armed Services committee that 
Iran is complying with the JCPOA and that the deal is in 
America's national security interest. Do you share those 
opinions?
    Colonel Thompson. Senator, I have not received the 
classified briefings during my time at State. I did, as 
National Security Advisor. During that time, the intelligence 
community briefed that they were not in violation.
    Senator Kaine. Will you take it from me that both 
Secretaries Tillerson and Mattis have publicly testified before 
these committees that they think Iran is complying with the 
JCPOA, and that the deal is in America's national security 
interest?
    Colonel Thompson. Sir, if they are complying, they are 
adhering to the JCPOA, and I have trust and confidence in both 
those Secretaries.
    Senator Kaine. Okay. Thank you.
    Given that, given that the North Korean threat is the most 
significant threat--and according to DNI Coates--and you guys 
agree with that--given that you agree that we need to focus 
whatever energy we have on finding a diplomatic resolution with 
North Korea, if that is possible, given that the DNI has stated 
that the JCPOA has stretched out the time for Iranian efforts 
to get a nuclear weapon, and that Secretaries Tillerson and 
Mattis say that they are complying and that the deal is in our 
national interest, what effect would stepping back from the 
Iran deal, or moving away from it--what message would that send 
to North Korea about the wisdom of doing a diplomatic deal with 
the United States?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    The importance of the Iranian regime to--very familiar with 
this committee--extending their footprint across the Middle 
East and the globe, we have seen, separate from the JCPOA----
    Senator Kaine. Well, and I am going to ask about that 
separately. But, I am now talking about a nuclear deal. Why 
would any nation enter into a nuclear deal with the United 
States if the United States backed away from other nuclear 
deals that U.S. officials said were in our national interest, 
U.S. officials said were being complied with?
    Colonel Thompson. Sir, great question. I would wager that 
North Korea will look for Iran to see how they react. But, in 
the end, I have--again, with the North Korean regime, that he 
will make his own decisions.
    Senator Kaine. He will make his own decisions. Do you think 
the U.S. should demonstrate good faith and live up to 
agreements that we enter into?
    Colonel Thompson. I do, sir.
    Senator Kaine. Yeah. Well, you see where I am going with 
this. I am extremely worried about the administration--about 
the President, frankly--stepping back from an Iran deal, when 
his own key security officials are saying that Iran is 
complying with it.
    On the non-nuclear issues that you were starting to raise, 
I think the committee is in general agreement on those, and we 
have acted strongly--Iran sanctions legislation we have put on 
the President's desk, sanctioning human rights behavior, 
aggression in the region, violations of U.N. missile protocols. 
I think we are very focused on Iranian misbehavior in those 
areas. But, when we have the IAEA, our European partners, and 
chief security professionals saying Iran is complying with the 
JCPOA, and the administration suggests we may step back from it 
at the same time as we want North Korea to potentially 
entertain doing a diplomatic deal with the United States, I 
think we send a message--we risk sending the message that, if 
you enter into a nuclear deal with the United States, the 
United States will not comply with it. And I think that would 
take whatever that percentage is of North Korea doing a deal--
say it is 20 percent--and drive it down to virtually zero.
    I will just conclude and say, you know, I am a member of 
the Armed Services and Foreign Relations committee, and I feel 
like the joint responsibility of these committees means we need 
to minimize the risk of necessary war, and we need to maximize 
the chance that we will overwhelmingly win any necessary war. I 
do not think we should raise the risk of unnecessary war by 
stepping back from international agreements that are being 
complied with.
    And I will hand that back to you, Mr. Chair.
    The Chairman. I think I still have a few seconds, before 
turning to Markey, left on my time.
    I--we are working with the administration, as you know, to 
try to make the agreement with Iran something that is better. I 
think you know that. A big part of that depends on our European 
allies and how they view the efforts that we may have inside, 
domestically. And then there is an effort underway, I think you 
know, to have some type of follow-on framework with our 
European allies. I know that you were instrumental, as was 
Senator Menendez and others, to give us an opportunity to weigh 
in on this. I would say that, in agreements like this, when we 
talk about the good faith of the United States, this was, in 
essence, entered into by one person. It was not entered into by 
Congress. I know there were a lot of people advising. And I 
think what that speaks to is that, when we have agreements like 
this that we want our Nation to honor, we should do it in a 
fashion where Congress also weighs in. And that is what led to 
the legislation that we all worked on.
    But, I, too, hope that we are able to resolve and 
strengthen this in a way that is good for the United States, 
good for the world. And I guess we have until May 12th to hope 
that, again, our European allies are--will work with us in that 
regard.
    Senator Markey.
    Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
    Ms. Thornton, I would like to turn to Asia. According to 
the recent National Security Strategy, the Trump administration 
pledged to redouble its commitments to established alliances 
and partnerships while expanding and deepening relationships 
with new partners in a region it describes as the most populous 
and economically dynamic part of the world.
    We have a serious threat from North Korea to the United 
States. China presents a significant strategic challenge to 
U.S. economic and security interests. But, judging by the State 
Department's fiscal year 2019 budget request, it is hard to 
believe that the administration agrees with that assessment 
that it made. The President's budget request released this week 
recommends cutting the State Department and USAID budgets by 
approximately 30 percent over the actual 2017 budget.
    Within the State Department budget, how would funding for 
Asia-related issues change as a result of those cuts from 2017 
to 2019 budget year?
    Ms. Thornton. Well, thank you, Senator.
    I think, you know, we, in the East Asia-Pacific Bureau of 
the State Department, are fairly used to dealing with lean 
resource issues. We are a very small bureau. We have a very 
small proportion, overall, of assistance funding. I think, if I 
am not mistaken, the budget numbers that were released this 
week are actually an increase for our part of the world over 
what was requested in last year's budget. And so, I am 
certainly hoping that we would see, along with the emphasis in 
the National Security Strategy, you know, the share the pie 
going to EAP. I think it is getting larger.
    Senator Markey. Well, that is not my understanding, but I 
will follow up with you on that issue, because, obviously, 
especially when we are talking about North Korea, it is very 
difficult to see a successfully implemented North Korea policy 
for both diplomacy and sanctions enforcement if there is no 
U.S. Ambassador to South Korea, if the Coordinator for 
Sanctions Policy position is eliminated. It is an almost 
shocking set of decisions that have been made, in terms of 
ensuring that these positions are filled and that they are 
fully funded in order to make sure that we avoid a catastrophic 
situation in Korea. And many of the other offices seem to be 
understaffed, as well.
    I have sent a letter to Secretary Tillerson expressing my 
concerns about the impact on Asia. And so, I would appreciate 
answers to the questions I am--I will be submitting to you in 
the very near future.
    On the question of South Korea--I mean, of Saudi Arabia, 
Ms. Thompson, we were told that there is a process that is now 
in place to determine what the offer will be to Saudi Arabia, 
in terms of a 123 agreement. Once this process is concluded, 
and before any formal discussions with Saudi Arabia, the Atomic 
Energy Act requires the President to keep this committee fully 
and currently informed of any initiative or negotiations 
relating to a new or amended agreement for peaceful nuclear 
cooperation. And I do not think that means just filling us in 
after the fact, after the deal has been negotiated. Will you 
commit to providing us with the information with regard to what 
the offer to the Saudi Arabians are going--is going to be, 
after you complete your process?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you, Senator. And thank you for 
making the time yesterday for our discussion yesterday. Very 
fruitful.
    I commit to you that I will work with you and this 
committee to keep you informed, if confirmed.
    Senator Markey. But, again, before the offer is made to the 
Saudi Arabians, will this committee know what that offer is 
going to be?
    Colonel Thompson. Sir, I can commit to you, if confirmed, I 
will work with the committee. I am not privy to where it is in 
the process, and I would work with the experts in the 
interagency and with the Secretary to make sure we keep the 
committee informed.
    Senator Markey. Well, again, under the law, you have a 
responsibility to keep this committee----
    Colonel Thompson. Absolutely.
    Senator Markey.--quote, ''fully and currently informed of 
any initiative or negotiations.``
    And finally, on the issue of Japan, Japan continues to give 
us--raise concerns about reprocessing of spent fuel into 
separated plutonium, when, one, it already has 48 tons of 
separated plutonium; two, Japan does not have an operating 
facility to turn its plutonium into fuel for nuclear reactors; 
and, three, the vast majority of Japan's nuclear reactors are 
not currently operating anyway. Do you think the United States 
should consider renegotiating the 123 agreement with Japan over 
its continued plutonium production to no purpose which seems to 
be related to the generation of electricity and could cause a 
real proliferation risk in that entire region?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    I--and I assure you that I will dig into this issue, if 
confirmed. I have great confidence in our diplomatic 
relationship with the Japanese, both from the President on down 
and the recency of--with the Secretary, a very strong 
relationship, both here and over in Japan, with our strong 
Ambassador, as well. And so, we will definitely work with the 
committee, and I will dig into that when--if confirmed.
    Senator Markey. Yeah. I think what is happening in Japan is 
potentially contributing to an increased risk for nuclear 
proliferation in that region. And the same thing would be true 
for a 123 agreement with Saudi Arabia that did not absolutely 
maintain the gold standard. And I think that we are going to 
need a very close cooperation between the committee and your 
Department in order to make sure that that is the case.
    Thank you so much.
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you.
    Did you have some followup questions? Go ahead. Yes, sir.
    Senator Menendez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    So, very quickly, Ms. Thornton, would you commit to us 
that, if confirmed, any recommendations you give regarding the 
trafficking-in-persons report will be based solely on a 
country's efforts to combat trafficking and not other unrelated 
factors?
    Ms. Thornton. Yes. If confirmed, I can certainly say that.
    Senator Menendez. Thank you very much.
    Ms. Thompson, should--there is some suggestion that we are 
going to have the possibility of a new 123 agreement with Saudi 
Arabia. Do you believe the gold standard should be implemented 
in any such agreement?
    Colonel Thompson. Thank you, Senator. I think we should 
always set our standards to meet the highest standards for the 
United States.
    Senator Menendez. So, in this case, the gold standard would 
be the higher standard. Is that a fair statement?
    Colonel Thompson. That is the standard of the community. 
Again, not privy to the conversations, but always want to work 
to the highest standards we can get.
    Senator Menendez. All right. What we do not need is a rush 
to nuclear power and a tinderbox of the world. And so, that is 
why the gold standard is so important.
    Mr. Fannon, I did not want you to feel left out of my 
affection, so let me ask you this. We talked yesterday about 
some of your past work and regarding your recusal from certain 
issues. And you noted, in our meeting yesterday, that you 
believe there would be a way for the ethics team to carve out 
some of your involvement. Have you been able to get any further 
clarity on that? Because I am trying to figure out what is it 
that you are carving out.
    Mr. Fannon. Yes. Thank you for the time yesterday, Senator. 
And thank you for your attention to the question.
    If confirmed, I can pledge to work diligently with the 
ethics attorneys and follow their instruction to the letter 
with respect to recusals.
    Senator Menendez. Okay. Well, we are--I appreciate that, 
and that is a good answer to start off with, but I am going to 
want to know exactly what Ethics is talking about in terms of 
carve-outs. Is it company-specific? Is it policy sectors? 
Because obviously there is a big difference. There is a big 
difference between carving yourself out from a specific 
company's involvement in which State, in your particular 
position of ENR, would involve, or whether there is a policy 
issue that would be involved. So, I hope we can get that answer 
so we can move your nomination along.
    Let me ask you this. As a lobbyist for Murphy Oil, you 
lobbied against my bills in the 111th and 112th Congress to 
hold oil companies accountable for disasters that they cause. 
So, as you are promoting energy across the globe, what degree 
of responsibility do you believe oil companies should bear for 
disaster mitigation when they cause a spill or disaster?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    We had the opportunity to discuss that bill, that 
legislation, and I--during our discussion, I commented that I 
laud the spirit in which it was offered to make sure that--to 
hold leaders to account, the situation with that bill. And we 
discussed it, in particular. But, more broadly to your 
question, I believe, as I spoke to in my opening, that 
transparency is critical. And a part of that is to have clearly 
delineated accountability measures.
    Senator Menendez. So, is it fair to say that, if you mess 
up, you clean up?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator.
    Senator Menendez. All right.
    Now, there is a lot of emphasis about fossil fuels with the 
administration, but your Department's stated objective under 
the State Department also talks about renewable energy sources 
as part of that. Are you committed to the Department's 
statement of its own purposes as it relates to ENR's mission, 
globally?
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator. Thank you for the question.
    The--my understanding of the Bureau, and as you read it to 
me during our meeting, was--is that they are agnostic as to 
fuel source, and they are there to support delivery of energy, 
and to support U.S. firms, et cetera. But, in terms of the type 
of source, it is agnostic.
    Senator Menendez. Well, my understanding from reading the 
statement is that it is not necessarily agnostic. It is not 
agnostic if you say, ''the pursuit of alternative energy and 
energy efficiency and greater transparency and accountability 
in the energy sector.`` The pursuit of something is not 
agnostic. It is actually a proactive word.
    Mr. Fannon. Yes, Senator. I was speaking in terms of--it is 
truly an all-of-the-above approach, is my understanding of the 
Bureau's work. And so, it--there would not be a weighted 
measure of one fuel source over another.
    Senator Menendez. Okay.
    I have a series of other questions. I will submit it for 
the record. I will look forward to your answers.
    Mr. Fannon. Thank you.
    Senator Menendez. Thank you all.
    The Chairman. We thank you all for your testimony and your 
willingness to serve in these capacities, as was mentioned on 
the front end.
    There will be other questions, as Senator Menendez just 
alluded to. And so, we are going to keep the record open until 
the close of business on Monday. I know, in this particular 
case, you will want to answer those very rapidly. We would hope 
that you would do so.
    Again, thank you for the great testimony today. I look 
forward to your service to our Nation. Thank you so much.
    The meeting is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]



                              ----------                              


              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Andrea Thompson by Senator Robert Menendez

Israel
    Question 1. A central hallmark of the U.S.-Israel relationship has 
been the close working relationship between the countries. It has long 
been U.S. policy to maintain and enhance Israel's qualitative military 
edge (QME)--effectively, Israel's ability to defend itself, by itself, 
against any threat or potential combination of threats. Given the 
threats along Israel's borders and the instability in the region 
overall, this U.S. commitment is of upmost importance. If confirmed, 
will you make ensuring Israel's QME is maintained a constant priority?

    Answer. Yes. Israel's security is paramount to U.S. foreign policy 
in the Middle East. If confirmed, I would ensure the commitment of the 
United States, by statutory requirement and longstanding policy, to 
ensuring Israel maintains its qualitative military edge (QME) by 
reviewing arms sales to the Middle East in the context of Israel's QME. 
As you are aware, the law requires that for any arms sale to the Middle 
East requiring Congressional Notification under the Arms Export Control 
Act, the notification must also include a determination that the sale 
does not adversely affect Israel's QME.

    Question 2. Do you support the provision of security assistance to 
Israel in accordance with the 2016 U.S.-Israel memorandum of 
understanding?

    Answer. Yes. U.S. support of Israel's security is steadfast, and 
Israel continues to be the leading recipient of U.S. Foreign Military 
Financing (FMF). In Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 and FY 2017, the 
administration requested $3.1 billion in FMF funding for Israel. As you 
reference, the United States and Israel recently signed a new 
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that lays out grant assistance 
funding levels from FY 2019 to FY 2028. The new MOU commits the United 
States to requesting $3.3 billion each year to Israel in FMF funds, 
plus an additional $500 million each year in DoD missile defense funds, 
for a total of $38 billion over this 10-year period. If confirmed, I 
will support this commitment.
Lebanon
    Question 3. The United States continues to provide extensive 
armament to the Lebanese Armed Forces. At the same time there are 
growing questions about the independence of the LAF and its connections 
to Hezbollah. What are your views of the Lebanese Armed Forces and 
whether the U.S. should continue to support them?

    Answer. Secretary Tillerson just returned from Beirut, where he had 
productive discussions with Lebanese leaders. U.S. assistance for 
Lebanon's security services, especially the Lebanese Armed Forces 
(LAF), is the backbone of U.S. policy to reinforce Lebanon's 
sovereignty, assert the Lebanese Government's authority throughout all 
of its territory, and ensure Lebanon remains a bulwark against violent 
extremism in a volatile region. Since 2006, the United States has made 
a $1.7 billion investment in the LAF that has paid outsized dividends 
for U.S. interests in the Middle East. Just in the last year, the LAF 
soundly defeated ISIS and al-Qaida, resumed control of several 
positions along the Syria border, and increased joint border patrols 
with the U.N. Interim Force in southern Lebanon--enforcing the Lebanese 
Government's sovereignty in Hizballah's historic heartland.
    If confirmed, I will work to ensure that the Lebanese army is an 
increasingly effective fighting force and one of our strongest counter-
terrorism partners in the region. Strengthening Lebanese state 
institutions like the LAF undermines Hizballah and its attempts to 
exploit a weak Lebanese Central Government. Without a strong military, 
Lebanon's existence as an independent and democratic ally in the region 
would be jeopardized. This would enable Hizballah to expand its 
influence and increase the risk of instability inside Lebanon and 
beyond.

    Question 4. Do you believe the United States should enter into a 
123 agreement with Saudi Arabia? Should the United States require Saudi 
Arabia to agree to the same no-enrichment standard that was set with 
the UAE?

    Answer. As I said during my hearing, I am committed to ensuring the 
United States maintains the highest nonproliferation standards in 
negotiation of our 123 Agreements and will support the longstanding 
U.S. policy of limiting the spread of enrichment and reprocessing 
capabilities. Saudi Arabia has decided to move forward with a civil 
nuclear power program, and concluding a 123 agreement with Saudi Arabia 
is in the United States' commercial and nonproliferation interests. If 
the United States and Saudi Arabia bring a 123 agreement into force and 
a U.S. company is chosen as Saudi Arabia's supplier, then its nuclear 
power program will be subject to the strongest nonproliferation, 
safety, and security standards required by any nuclear supplier in the 
world. Conversely, in the absence of a 123 agreement, U.S. firms will 
lose the opportunity to compete for a place in a potentially sizeable 
market and will almost certainly be replaced by state-supported 
enterprises from other countries that demand far less stringent safety, 
security, and nonproliferation protection than we do.
NPR (Nuclear Posture Review)
    Question 5. The Nuclear Posture Review calls for the development of 
several new nuclear systems including a new nuclear warhead for our 
submarine forces and a sea-launched cruise missile. This is in addition 
to a new ground launched cruise missile that was announced during the 
view of the United States response to Russia's INF violation.

   How are our allies reacting to the United States call for the 
        development of new nuclear system meant to counter Russia's 
        GLCM?
   Would you consider the input of our allies valuable when dealing 
        with INF?

    Answer. While public responses of allied and partner government 
officials have varied since the February 2 release of the Nuclear 
Posture Review (NPR), I understand that allies expressed gratitude for 
the opportunity to hold confidential consultations with the United 
States and provide their views during the drafting process of the NPR 
and stated that they were unsurprised by the final report. My 
understanding is that nearly all allies expressed concern about the 
deteriorating security environment and appreciation for the continued 
U.S. commitment to extended deterrence and to our long-term 
nonproliferation and disarmament goals.
    Allied input on the INF Treaty is valuable. I understand that the 
administration continues to keep European and East Asian allies 
apprised of U.S. efforts through the integrated strategy to seek 
Russia's return to compliance with the Intermediate-Range Nuclear 
Forces (INF) Treaty. This includes all three lines of effort in the 
administration's INF integrated strategy: diplomatic, economic, and 
military. The North Atlantic Council made a strong, unified statement 
in December 2017. The statement noted that full compliance with the INF 
Treaty is essential to strategic stability and collective allied 
security, affirmed the United States is in compliance with the Treaty 
while declaring Russia's conduct raises serious concerns regarding its 
own compliance, and highlighted the Alliance's shared goal of returning 
Russia to full and verifiable compliance with the Treaty.
DRL
    Question 6. It is crucial for DRL to be involved in review both DCS 
and FMS proposed arms sales to ensure that this crucial form of U.S. 
Security Assistance is not undermining U.S. policies and objectives to 
promote human rights abroad.

   Will you commit that DRL will be involved in reviewing all FMS and 
        DCS cases in which they have human rights concerns regarding 
        the recipient country?
   Do you commit to giving DRL equal weight to the recommendations of 
        the regional bureaus and PM regarding all such cases?
   If necessary, will you grant DRL direct access to you to make a 
        case for denial or modification of a sale for which they have 
        concerns?''

    Answer. DRL is a vital part of the Department's arms sales reviews, 
and human rights is a key criteria in considering arms transfers as 
codified in the U.S. Conventional Arms Transfer Policy (CAT Policy), 
Presidential guidance that outlines the criteria for case by case 
review of all arms sales. I can assure you that if I am confirmed I 
will continue to respect the vital role that DRL plays in arms sales 
reviews and will ensure that human rights concerns that DRL or other 
offices raise are taken seriously. It is my understanding that a 
process exists by which DRL or other offices can make a case to me for 
denial or modification of a sale about which they have concerns. I will 
maintain this practice, if confirmed.
    All arms transfer decisions are guided by the criteria outlined in 
the CAT Policy, which requires that we maintain the appropriate balance 
between legitimate arms transfers to support U.S. national security and 
that of our allies and partners, and

    Answer. the need for restraint against the transfer of arms that 
would enhance the military capabilities of hostile states, serve to 
facilitate human rights abuses or violations of international 
humanitarian law, or otherwise undermine international security.
Elliot Broidy
    Question 7. Recent reporting revealed that in or about October 2014 
2017, Elliot Broidy presented President Trump with a proposal to 
recruit a ``thousands-strong international Muslim army--to be advised 
by retired Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal'' and that ``the team behind 
the Muslim army plan was led by McChrystal.''

   Were you ever aware of this plan during your time as a Director at 
        the McChrystal group, Deputy Assistant to the President in the 
        White House, or Senior Advisor at the Department of State?

    Answer. No.

    Question 8. If so, please describe what you knew about the plan and 
when you knew it. Please also describe your assessment of the 
feasibility and policy implications of this plan.

    Answer. N/A
DRL

    Question 9.  You answered only one of the three questions I 
submitted to you in writing on the role of DRL in reviewing DCS and FMS 
proposed arms sales. Please answer the following:

   Do you commit to giving DRL equal weight to the recommendations of 
        the regional bureaus and PM regarding all such cases?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 10.  If necessary, will you grant DRL direct access to you 
to make a case for denial or modification of a sale for which they have 
concerns?

    Answer. Yes.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Andrea Thompson by Senator Edward J. Markey

    Question 1. Do you believe achieving the gold standard--securing a 
commitment by other nations not to enrich or reprocess--should be a 
prerequisite for concluding a 123 agreement with the United States? Why 
is the Trump administration still conducting an internal process to 
decide what concessions we might be willing to offer to Saudi Arabia to 
try and conclude a 123 agreement? Will you commit to getting answers 
and briefing me once this ``process'' is concluded and before any 
formal discussions with Saudi Arabia?

    Answer. As I testified, I have not been privy to the talks to date 
with Saudi Arabia, but, if confirmed, it will be my goal to have the 
strongest nonproliferation standards possible. The United States has a 
longstanding policy of limiting the spread of enrichment and 
reprocessing capabilities around the world. If confirmed, I commit to 
keeping the committee fully abreast of the status of all 123 agreement 
negotiations.

    Question 2. Has the U.S. Government raised its concerns with Japan 
over its continued reprocessing of spent fuel into separated plutonium 
when: 1) it already has 48 tons of separated plutonium, 2) Japan does 
not have an operating facility to turn its plutonium into fuel for 
nuclear reactors, and 3) the vast majority of Japan's nuclear reactors 
are not currently operating anyway? Do you think the United States 
should consider re-negotiating its 123 agreement with Japan over its 
continued plutonium production?

    Answer. As I testified during my confirmation hearing, I assure you 
that I will dig into this issue, if confirmed. As I told the committee, 
I have great confidence in our diplomatic relationship with the 
Japanese. As stalwart partners on both nonproliferation and civil 
nuclear energy, the United States and Japan regularly discuss a wide 
range of related issues, including Japan's nuclear fuel management 
policies.

    Question 3. If you agree that the New START Treaty is beneficial to 
the United States, then why hasn't the Trump administration announced 
its intent to pursue a 5 year extension of the Treaty until 2026? Does 
the Trump administration not support pursuing such an extension?

    Answer. The stated policy of the Trump administration is that the 
United States will continue to fully implement New START, which 
contributes to preserving strategic stability between the United States 
and Russia and is a critical component of global nuclear 
nonproliferation efforts. If confirmed, I look forward to participating 
in discussions on the next steps on New START Treaty.

    Question 4. If New START is beneficial to the U.S., why wouldn't we 
announce our intent to pursue extending the central limits? Wouldn't 
that send a positive signal about our leadership on arms control and 
reduction efforts around the world without prematurely committing us 
into anything?

    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to supporting U.S. actions to 
continue to fully implement New START, which contributes to preserving 
strategic stability between the United States and Russia and is a 
critical component of global nuclear nonproliferation efforts. I 
understand the administration's immediate focus is on the next data 
exchange, which will provide the numbers of U.S. and Russian strategic 
offensive arms as of February 5, 2018. The United States hopes to 
exchange this data with Russia in late February or early March. As I 
testified, we have a few years to assess before making any decisions on 
the extension of New START, but it was a very promising sign that both 
parties complied with the central limits to the New START agreement by 
February 5.

    Question 5. Do you believe the Iran nuclear agreement is in the 
U.S. national security interest?

    Answer. The President and the administration have been clear about 
concerns regarding the JCPOA. As I testified during my nomination 
hearing, I have broader concerns about Iran's activities as they extend 
their footprint across the Middle East and the globe. Iran's continued 
malign activities in the region, including ballistic missile activities 
and support for terrorism and regional proxies, undermine expectations 
that the JCPOA would positively contribute to regional and 
international peace and security. The President has requested that 
Congress work with the administration to address the JCPOA's flaws, 
including through amending and strengthening the Iran Nuclear Agreement 
Review Act (INARA). In parallel, I understand discussions are underway 
in Europe. If confirmed, I look forward to being part of these 
discussions to ensure the JCPOA contributes to regional and 
international peace and security.

    Question 6. If the United States believes that Iran is not in 
compliance with its commitments under the nuclear deal, why has the 
United States not engaged in the formal dispute resolution process 
outlined in the Iran deal that is supposed to be used by any party that 
believes other parties to the agreement are not meeting their 
commitments?

    Answer. Although I am not yet engaged in these discussions, I 
understand the United States has engaged Iran directly and in 
cooperation with our P5+1 partners to ensure strict technical 
implementation of the deal. While to date the United States has not 
deemed it necessary to invoke the dispute resolution mechanism 
contained in the JCPOA, you are correct that it is a tool available to 
the United States. The United States continues to uphold its JCPOA 
commitments and continues to hold Iran strictly accountable to its 
nuclear-related commitments under the deal--including its obligation to 
comply with all IAEA requests for access to sites the Agency feels it 
needs to visit in order to carry out its verification responsibilities 
in Iran.

    Question 7. How would the other parties to the agreement react to 
the United States unilaterally pulling out of the deal? Is the Trump 
administration ready to impose secondary sanctions on European 
companies and banks like Airbus and DeutscheBank?

    Answer. While President Trump has made clear that we must fix the 
flaws in the JCPOA or the United States will withdraw, the 
administration has not announced any intention to end participation in 
the JCPOA at this time, and the United States continues to uphold its 
JCPOA commitments. As I understand the current approach, with the 
United States is engaging European partners to achieve a commitment to 
address the deficiencies identified in the deal and develop a shared 
understanding of how to counter Iran's broader destabilizing 
activities. Part of this will be to negotiate in some form a 
supplemental agreement that would impose new multilateral sanctions if 
Iran thwarts inspections or gets too close to the capability to produce 
fissile material for a nuclear weapon. Additionally, the United States 
is seeking an agreement that provides strong consequences, including 
new sanctions, if Iran develops or tests long-range missiles.

    Question 8. If the United States leaves the Iran nuclear deal, what 
do you think the implications are for international nuclear 
nonproliferation efforts? Do you think reneging on commitments we made 
and trying to change them either be re-imposing sanctions or taking 
legislative action will make it easier or more difficult to negotiate 
nonproliferation agreements with other countries (like North Korea)?

    Answer. While President Trump has made clear his direction to 
negotiators to fix the flaws in the JCPOA or the United States will 
withdraw, the administration has not announced any intention to end 
participation in the JCPOA at this time. The United States continues to 
uphold its JCPOA commitments, and to hold Iran strictly accountable to 
its nuclear-related commitments under the deal--including those related 
to IAEA inspector access. European partners have signaled a willingness 
to cooperate with the United States to address Iran's malign actions 
outside the JCPOA and other long term proliferation challenges where 
international support remains crucial, including North Korea.
    Regardless of the future of the JCPOA, Iran's nuclear activities 
must remain exclusively peaceful and Iran must cooperate fully with its 
continuing NPT and related IAEA safeguards obligations. The global 
nonproliferation regime, and the NPT in particular, must be able to 
address cases of noncompliance. The strength and durability of the NPT 
depends on common efforts of nations around the world to reinforce the 
nuclear nonproliferation regime and to combat threats to international 
security.

    Question 9. Why do you believe tax dollars are better spent 
investing in new nuclear capabilities rather than investing more 
heavily in diplomacy or even conventional systems? Won't they just 
provide the justification countries like Russia are looking for not to 
comply with their commitments?

    Answer. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review seeks to deter potential 
adversaries from thinking they can gain any advantage through the use 
of nuclear weapons and seeks to encourage Russia to engage seriously on 
reducing its large disparity of non-strategic nuclear weapons. The 
deterrence effects that nuclear weapons provide are unique and 
essential to preventing nuclear attack--the only existential threat to 
the United States and its allies and partners. The administration's 
nuclear modernization program remains the most effective and least 
costly approach to sustaining the U.S. nuclear arsenal and an effective 
nuclear deterrent.

    Question 10. Do you believe we need the ``supplements'' called for 
in the recently-released Nuclear Posture Review? If so, why? Please 
explain for both the low-yield SLBM and then the Sea-Launched Cruise 
Missile.

    Answer. As outlined in the 2018 NPR, these supplements create 
incentives for Russia to return to diplomacy on reducing the disparity 
in non-strategic nuclear weapons. As the 2018 NPR states, these 
supplements will ``provide a more diverse set of characteristics 
greatly enhancing our ability to tailor deterrence and assurance; 
expand the range of credible U.S. options for responding to nuclear or 
non-nuclear strategic attack; and, enhance deterrence by signaling to 
potential adversaries that their concepts of coercive, limited nuclear 
escalation offer no exploitable advantage.'' They enhance crisis and 
strategic stability by raising a potential adversary's risks and making 
clear the United States has both the means and the willingness to 
respond at all levels of conflict. This raises the stakes for 
adversaries, induces their restraint, and thereby reinforces stability.
    A low-yield ballistic missile (LYBM) is not a new warhead as only 
nuclear components already present in the stockpile will be used. The 
LYBM is necessary to achieve our tailored deterrence objectives and to 
meet the roles of nuclear weapons described in the 2018 Nuclear Posture 
Review (NPR). The LYBM will use the existing W76-1 warhead, but will be 
configured to provide the President with an additional response option 
to deliver a low-yield nuclear weapon able to overcome advanced 
adversary air defenses. The NPR calls for the pursuit of a sea-launched 
cruise missile (SLCM) capability that can be fielded in about 7-10 
years, pending additional study. The NPR further notes that the United 
States may reconsider the pursuit of a SLCM ``if Russia returns to 
compliance with its arms control obligations, reduces its non-strategic 
nuclear arsenal, and corrects its other destabilizing behaviors.'' The 
pursuit of a nuclear SLCM capability will enhance deterrence in a 
strategic environment that has significantly worsened since the 2010 
NPR. Both supplements would be compliant with all treaties and 
agreements, including obligations under the New START Treaty.

    Question 11. Please describe how America's allies and partner 
nations have responded to the Nuclear Posture Review. Have any 
expressed concerns with the policies it outlines? If so, please 
describe the specific concerns shared.

    Answer. While public responses of allied and partner government 
officials have varied since the February 2 release of the Nuclear 
Posture Review (NPR), allies expressed gratitude for the opportunity to 
hold confidential consultations with the United States and provide 
their views during the drafting process of the NPR, and stated that 
they were unsurprised by the final report. While our consultations 
produced a variety of views nearly all U.S. allies expressed concern 
about the deteriorating security environment and appreciation for our 
continued commitment to extended deterrence and to our long-term 
nonproliferation and disarmament goals.

    Question 12. On what basis does the administration believe that 
developing and possibly deploying a new, road mobile ground-launched 
cruise missile will convince Russia to return to compliance with the 
INF Treaty? How does this enhance our diplomatic leverage? Isn't it 
just throwing good money after a weapons system we don't really need or 
want while backing us into a corner if Russia doesn't ``back down?''

    Answer. The administration remains committed to the INF Treaty, and 
its integrated strategy of diplomatic, economic, and military measures 
seeks to return Russia to full and verifiable compliance. Since the 
United States publicly announced Russia's violation in 2014, Russia has 
taken no step to return to compliance. The U.S. integrated strategy 
includes a review of options for a conventional, ground launched 
intermediate range missile system, which would enable the United States 
to better defend the United States and allies should Russia not return 
to compliance. The purpose is to make clear to Russia that it will be 
less secure--not more--if it persists in its violation, and to deny 
Russia the military advantage it has sought with the development of a 
prohibited system. This step does not violate U.S. obligations under 
the Treaty, and will be reversed if Russia returns to compliance.

    Question 13. Doesn't the development of a new GLCM provide Putin a 
propaganda victory and a ``legitimate'' reason to blame the U.S. for 
the collapse of the INF Treaty and begin deploying large numbers of 
illegal missiles without any constraints?

    Answer. No. The United States is in compliance with the Treaty. 
Russia is developing an illegal missile system in spite of the 
constraints of the Treaty. The administration's review of military 
concepts and options to induce Russia to return to compliance, 
including options for a conventional, ground launched intermediate 
range missile systems, does not violate U.S. obligations under the 
Treaty. As the administration has described publicly, this step will be 
reversed if Russia returns to compliance.

    Question 14. How did our NATO allies react to the news that the 
United States plans to develop a new road mobile GLCM that if deployed 
would necessarily be placed in Europe? To your knowledge, are there any 
NATO or East Asian allies that would allow the United States to base a 
new road mobile ground launched cruise missile on their territory? If 
the development of a new GLCM becomes a controversial issue within the 
alliance, wouldn't that play into Moscow's efforts to divide the 
alliance and take the spotlight off its violation?

    Answer. I understand that the administration continues to keep 
European and East Asian allies apprised of its efforts to seek Russia's 
return to full and verifiable compliance with the Intermediate Range 
Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty. If confirmed, maintaining allied cohesion 
and responding in concert will be a critical element of U.S. diplomatic 
pressure to bring Russia back into compliance. The North Atlantic 
Council made a strong, unified statement in December 2017. It noted 
that full compliance with the INF Treaty is essential to strategic 
stability and collective allied security, affirmed the United States is 
in compliance with the Treaty while declaring Russia's conduct raises 
serious concerns regarding its own compliance, and highlighted the 
Alliance's shared goal of returning Russia to full and verifiable 
compliance with the Treaty.

    Question 15. To help resolve the noncompliance issues, will the new 
administration consider offering transparency measures to address the 
Russian charge that U.S. SM-3 launchers in Europe can contain ground 
launched cruise missiles?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to engage Russian officials 
in multiple venues, including the Special Verification Commission 
(SVC), to explain in a transparent, substantive, and constructive 
manner why U.S. actions in these areas are compliant with the INF 
Treaty. In December 2017, the United States publicly detailed these 
positions in a fact sheet on the Department of State website.

    Question 16. In testimony to the House Armed Services committee in 
March, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Paul Selva 
stated that ``There are no military requirements we cannot currently 
satisfy due to our compliance with the INF Treaty.'' Do you agree with 
this statement?

    Answer. General Selva's comments appear to reinforce the 
administration's approach to finding a diplomatic solution to Russia's 
violation, and preserving the INF Treaty. If confirmed, I commit to 
supporting such a diplomatic approach to bring Russia back into 
compliance with its INF obligations.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                Andrea Thompson by Senator Jeff Merkley

    Question 1. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) appears to be a 
major departure from the previous administration which reduced the role 
and number of nuclear weapons. Is it your understanding that the Trump 
administration will not seek a numerical increase in the number of 
deployed or non-deployed nuclear weapons?

    Answer. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) represents broad 
continuity with decades of U.S. deterrence thinking. It fully endorses 
the planned nuclear modernization program, which is a one-for-one 
replacement of current weapons with similar systems, and adds two 
supplements to provide flexible capabilities that enable a tailored 
strategy without calling for an increase in the numbers of U.S. 
strategic nuclear forces. The NPR further affirms the U.S. commitment 
to continue abiding by all of its obligations under the New START 
Treaty, the Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, and all 
other arms control treaties and agreements to which the United States 
is a party.
    The near-term low-yield ballistic missile remains accountable under 
the New START Treaty and will use existing warheads and missile bodies. 
The longer-term sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM) returns a capability 
that the United States deployed for decades, and will use a warhead 
based on a previous design, although the specific design has not yet 
been selected. Neither represents a new capability nor does the 
administration expect the supplements will lead to a growth in the U.S. 
stockpile. Moreover, the NPR states that the United States may 
reconsider pursuit of the SLCM ``if Russia returns to compliance with 
its arms control obligations, reduces its non-strategic nuclear 
arsenal, and corrects its other destabilizing behaviors.''

    Question 2. The 2018 NPR calls--for this first time since the 
1980's--to potentially develop new nuclear weapons, including those 
that are lower yield, and thus, arguably more usable. Do you believe 
these low-yield weapons would serve as a deterrent in a conventional 
war?

    Answer. One of the roles articulated in the 2018 Nuclear Posture 
Review (NPR) is to deter nuclear and non-nuclear attack. In his preface 
to the report, Secretary of Defense Mattis states: ``This review rests 
on a bedrock truth: nuclear weapons have and will continue to play a 
critical role in deterring nuclear attack and in preventing large-scale 
conventional warfare between nuclear-armed states for the foreseeable 
future.'' If confirmed, I would support this approach, which is 
consistent with more than 70 years of U.S. nuclear weapons policy and 
all previous NPRs.

    Question 3. Does the development of a new low-yield and more usable 
weapon imply the United States is open to first use of nuclear weapons?

    Answer. In its more than 70 years of possessing nuclear weapons, 
the United States has never had a no-first-use or ``sole purpose'' 
policy of nuclear weapons use. As the 2010 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) 
stated, the security conditions for a ``sole purpose'' policy did not 
exist. Since 2010, those security conditions have worsened. The 2018 
NPR seeks to provide greater clarity on the conditions that could lead 
the United States to consider employing nuclear weapons. I understand 
the drafters sought to better clarify the ``extreme circumstances'' 
that could lead the United States to consider a nuclear response in 
order to increase stability by mitigating miscalculations and risk-
taking by potential adversaries.

    Question 4. What impact would U.S. first use, or the threat there 
of, do to international stability?

    Answer. Consistent with U.S. policy over the past 70 years and all 
previous Nuclear Posture Reviews (NPRs), the United States has not 
adopted a no first-use nor ``sole purpose'' doctrine. The 2010 NPR 
concluded that the conditions in the security environment at that time 
were not conducive to such policies, and the security environment has 
since deteriorated further. As declared in the 2018 NPR, the United 
States would only consider the employment of nuclear weapons in extreme 
circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States or its 
allies and partners. The United States will not use or threaten to use 
nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon States that are Party to the 
Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and that are 
in compliance with their nuclear non-proliferation obligations.

    Question 5. Do you believe nuclear weapons can or should have a war 
fighting role?

    Answer. The fundamental nature of deterrence is to decisively 
influence an adversary's decisions in order to deter attack. Thus, 
nuclear weapons are not a warfighting capability but a deterrent 
capability.

    Question 6. Do the development of these weapons mean that the Trump 
administration disagrees with President Reagan's often repeated adage 
that: ``a nuclear war cannot be won, and must never be fought?''

    Answer. The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) reflects continuity 
between this administration's strategy-driven approach and President 
Reagan's adage. The report states: ``As Secretary of Defense Mattis has 
observed, `a safe, secure, and effective nuclear deterrent is there to 
ensure a war that can never be won, is never fought.' '' In his preface 
to the NPR, Secretary Mattis also wrote ``nuclear forces, along with 
our conventional forces and other instruments of national power, are 
therefore first and foremost directed towards deterring aggression and 
preserving peace.''

    Question 7. You testified to the fact that the continued 
implementation of the New START Treaty remains in the U.S. national 
security interest. You also confirmed that Russia has complied by 
meeting the Treaty's central limits as required by February 5, 2018. 
What are your plans to negotiate an extension of the Treaty for an 
additional five years until 2026?

    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to supporting U.S. actions to 
continue to fully implement New START, which contributes to preserving 
strategic stability between the United States and Russia and is a 
critical component of global nuclear nonproliferation efforts. I 
understand the administration's immediate focus is on the next data 
exchange, which will provide the numbers of U.S. and Russian strategic 
offensive arms as of February 5, 2018. The United States hopes to 
exchange this data with Russia in late February or early March. As I 
testified, we have a few years to assess before making any decisions on 
the extension of New START, but it was a very promising sign that both 
parties complied with the central limits to the New START agreement by 
February 5.

    Question 8. If confirmed, your position will be responsible for 
leading negotiations with other nations on civilian nuclear cooperation 
agreements (123 agreements). The Trump administration is reportedly 
considering negotiating a 123 agreement with Saudi Arabia. You 
testified to the fact that you would seek ``the highest (non-
proliferation) standard achievable.'' Can you commit that the 
administration would accept no less than the ``Gold Standard'' of 
prohibiting uranium enrichment or plutonium reprocessing) achieved with 
the United Arab Emirates (UAE)?

    Answer. As I testified, I have not been privy to the talks to date 
with Saudi Arabia, but, if confirmed, it will be my goal to have the 
strongest nonproliferation standards possible. The United States has a 
longstanding policy of limiting the spread of enrichment and 
reprocessing capabilities around the world.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Andrea Thompson by Senator Cory A. Booker

    Question 1. One of the most dangerous developments of recent years 
has been the proliferation of nuclear weapons in South Asia. Since the 
1998 tests, India and Pakistan have both deployed increasingly 
sophisticated nuclear weapons on a range of platforms. A nuclear war in 
South Asia could easily lead to millions of casualties and the United 
States needs to do everything in its power to prevent such a conflict. 
I am very alarmed that our confrontational approach to Pakistan may 
endanger our ability to work with them on these vital issues. That 
being said:

   What are the plans to improve strategic stability in South Asia to 
        move India and Pakistan away from the precipice of nuclear war? 
        Will you personally lead talks on this subject?

    Answer. Pakistan and India both continue to produce fissile 
material for nuclear weapons and to expand their nuclear weapons and 
missile stockpiles. I share your concern regarding the increased 
security challenges that accompany growing stockpiles, the effects of 
certain actual or potential weapons programs upon stability, and the 
risk that a conventional conflict between India and Pakistan could 
escalate to include nuclear use.If confirmed, one of my first 
priorities will be to resume the Security, Strategic Stability, and 
Nonproliferation talks with Pakistan, which provide a dedicated venue 
to exchange views on Pakistan's intentions and defense needs, as well 
as strategic stability. I will also seek to discuss these important 
issues with India as we strengthen our bilateral relationship.

    Question 2. One of the most dangerous developments of recent years 
has been the proliferation of nuclear weapons in South Asia. Since the 
1998 tests, India and Pakistan have both deployed increasingly 
sophisticated nuclear weapons on a range of platforms. A nuclear war in 
South Asia could easily lead to millions of casualties and the United 
States needs to do everything in its power to prevent such a conflict. 
I am very alarmed that our confrontational approach to Pakistan may 
endanger our ability to work with them on these vital issues. That 
being said:

   What recent talks have been held with Pakistan and India regarding 
        these issues, and what were the outcomes?

    Answer. I understand that the last formal Strategic Security 
Dialogue that focused on these issues with India both took place in May 
2016. If confirmed, I look forward to being fully briefed on these 
talks, their outcomes, and implementation efforts to date.

    Question 3. One of the most dangerous developments of recent years 
has been the proliferation of nuclear weapons in South Asia. Since the 
1998 tests, India and Pakistan have both deployed increasingly 
sophisticated nuclear weapons on a range of platforms. A nuclear war in 
South Asia could easily lead to millions of casualties and the United 
States needs to do everything in its power to prevent such a conflict. 
I am very alarmed that our confrontational approach to Pakistan may 
endanger our ability to work with them on these vital issues. That 
being said:

   What is the administration view of India's development of what is, 
        essentially, an ICBM in the form of the AGNI V? Can this 
        missile range all of the United States?

    Answer. The administration continues to urge all states with 
nuclear weapons to exercise restraint regarding missile capability 
testing. The administration encourages efforts to promote confidence 
building and stability and to discourage actions that might destabilize 
the region. India advertises the AGNI V as a deterrent and having a 
range of approximately 5000 km.

    Question 4. One of the most dangerous developments of recent years 
has been the proliferation of nuclear weapons in South Asia. Since the 
1998 tests, India and Pakistan have both deployed increasingly 
sophisticated nuclear weapons on a range of platforms. A nuclear war in 
South Asia could easily lead to millions of casualties and the United 
States needs to do everything in its power to prevent such a conflict. 
I am very alarmed that our confrontational approach to Pakistan may 
endanger our ability to work with them on these vital issues. That 
being said:

   What are your ideas for slowing or ending the arms race in South 
        Asia?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would encourage India and Pakistan to 
resume dialogue with each other on this important issue, and I would 
encourage countries in possession of nuclear weapons to meet to discuss 
common concerns, confidence building, and risk reduction mechanisms.

    Question 5. One of the great challenges we face today is the spread 
of dual use technology that enables nuclear or other WMD proliferation. 
In some cases countries lack the capacity to enforce their United 
Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 obligations to prevent such 
proliferation. In other cases, countries ignore the proliferation 
activities of their national companies. We need to do everything 
possible to prevent proliferation. I was very concerned to see the FY 
2019 request for NADR funds cut by nearly one-third from the levels 
appropriated in FY 18:

   Given the role that NADR funding plays in support of the Export and 
        Related Border Security Program in improving countries 
        capacities to meet their UNSCR 1540 obligations and prevent 
        proliferation, why has this funding request come in so much 
        below the FY 2018 levels?

    Answer. The FY 2019 funding request for the Export Control and 
Related Border Security Program (EXBS) was straight-lined from the FY 
2018 level at $59.6 million. While the overall NADR request was 
reduced, I understand that funding was protected for key WMD 
nonproliferation programs in order to prevent them from being adversely 
affected.

    Question 6. One of the great challenges we face today is the spread 
of dual use technology that enables nuclear or other WMD proliferation. 
In some cases countries lack the capacity to enforce their United 
Nations Security Council Resolution 1540 obligations to prevent such 
proliferation. In other cases, countries ignore the proliferation 
activities of their national companies. We need to do everything 
possible to prevent proliferation. I was very concerned to see the FY 
2019 request for NADR funds cut by nearly one-third from the levels 
appropriated in FY 18:

   Given that North Korea has built its nuclear program by using 
        illicit procurement and financial networks, many of which 
        involve China, what additional measures will the administration 
        consider pursuing with China to inhibit the North Korean 
        program?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will prioritize U.S. diplomacy to bring 
maximum pressure on North Korea and cut off its capacity to violate the 
U.N. Security Council resolutions. I look forward, if confirmed, to 
being fully briefed on our current range of actions to press Chinese 
officials to do more to fully implement the requirements set out in the 
U.N. Security Council Resolutions.
    If confirmed, I also look forward to reviewing and enhancing our 
broader efforts to bolster the ability of high-risk countries to meet 
UNSCR requirements and prevent the diversion of WMD-related materials 
to rogue states and terrorists. For example, EXBS programs are active 
in critical transshipment hubs like Malaysia, Singapore, Vietnam, South 
Africa, Tanzania, and Panama, and in countries that pose proliferation 
financing risks in the Asia Pacific, Middle East and North Africa, and 
South and Central Asia.

    Question 7. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty is a cornerstone of 
both the efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and to verify 
the activities of countries that have nuclear weapons through the use 
of international monitoring. The United States has signed but not 
ratified the treaty.

   Does the Trump administration support United States ratification of 
        the CTBT?
   Does the administration support continued American funding for the 
        Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Organization and the 
        international monitoring stations?

    Answer. I understand that the administration will not seek 
ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, but the 
United States intends to abide by its unilateral nuclear explosive 
testing moratorium and calls on all states possessing nuclear weapons 
to declare or maintain a moratorium on nuclear explosive testing.
    Further I understand that the United States will continue to 
support the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization 
Preparatory Commission's development and operation of the International 
Monitoring System and supporting systems, which serve to monitor for 
nuclear tests and also provide collateral benefits.

    Question 8. I am concerned by calls in the Nuclear Posture Review 
for the development of new low yield warheads to be deployed on sea 
based platforms alongside higher yield systems. My view is that this 
can lead to a dangerous situation in which Russia (or another 
adversary) would not know what sort of warhead was on an incoming 
system.

   What is the rationale behind the development of the low yield 
        nuclear warheads?
   How do you see this warhead impacting strategic stability or crisis 
        stability in a conflict situation?

    Answer. While I was not part of the deliberations on the 2018 
Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), that document recommends pursuing 
supplemental low-yield capabilities that provide flexibility and 
bolster the credibility of our deterrent force. These capabilities are 
meant to strengthen deterrence by denying potential adversaries any 
mistaken confidence that their limited nuclear employment can provide a 
useful advantage over the United States or its allies.
    This capability is intended to reinforce strategic stability and 
crisis stability. Russia has made clear in its statements and actions 
that it perceives some advantage by maintaining the existing disparity 
in non-strategic nuclear weapons. The low-yield sea-based capability 
demonstrates to Russia, in a measured way, that the United States has 
the ability to respond proportionately to Russia's use of non-strategic 
nuclear weapons. Expanding survivable U.S. response options beyond only 
high-yield weapons raises the nuclear threshold in crisis by 
introducing an additional risk to Russia and thereby enhances strategic 
stability.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Susan A. Thornton by Senator Robert Menendez

Indo-Pacific Strategy

    Question 1. Our National Security Strategy defines China as a rival 
and a revisionist power. It lays out that ``China and Russia challenge 
American power, influence, and interests, attempting to erode American 
security and prosperity.''

   If we view our relationship as zero-sum what incentive does China 
        have to working with us on issues such as North Korea, climate 
        change, or maritime disputes?

    Answer. As Secretary Tillerson stated during the Diplomatic and 
Security Dialogue with China in June 2017, the United States seeks a 
constructive and results-oriented relationship with China. If 
confirmed, I will pursue the bilateral relationship with China 
consistent with this vision, but remain clear-eyed on the need to stand 
up for our interests and those of our allies and partners whenever 
necessary. This includes pushing China to do more on collective 
security challenges, the most pressing of which is the North Korea's 
illegal ballistic missile and nuclear weapons program, our top national 
security priority. This also includes making sure that this remains a 
top agenda item in our discussions with senior Chinese officials. If 
confirmed, I will work to ensure that our economic relationship with 
China is fair and reciprocal and not marred by the unfair practices 
China has pursued in recent years. However, I will not shrink from 
responding to Beijing's challenges to the rules-based system, or from 
China's efforts to subvert the sovereignty of its neighbors and other 
Indo-Pacific nations, if confirmed. I will also remain committed to 
standing up for freedom and human dignity, and continue to push China 
to respect universal human rights and fundamental freedoms.

    Question 2.  What is our affirmative agenda with China? I know what 
we're doing to China but what (global and regional) issues are we 
actively trying to work with them on?

    Answer. When appropriate, we should seek to broaden practical 
cooperation and achieve results on issues of shared concern. If 
confirmed, I will seek to make progress and achieve results on issues 
like the U.S. opioid crisis, preventing global pandemics, and 
strengthening international peacekeeping efforts. We should also 
continue working with China to address regional challenges such as 
achieving lasting peace in Afghanistan. Previous successes the United 
States has had working with China on issues like wildlife trafficking 
and global health security show that it is possible to cooperate with 
China on issues of mutual interest.

    Question 3. Senior administration officials, including Secretary 
Tillerson, have said that human rights are ``embedded'' in U.S. policy. 
However, President Trump has called President Xi ``a very special man'' 
who is ``highly respected'' and a ``powerful representative of his 
people'' and left human rights off the agenda when he visited Beijing 
this past November. President Trump has boasted about having a ``great 
relationship'' with President Duterte who has killed his own people 
without due process--which President Trump appears to have a 
situational affection for--in his misguided drug war.

   Mrs. Thornton, do you agree with President Trump that President Xi 
        is a ``powerful representative of his people'' or that 
        President Duterte should be lauded and admired?

    Answer. I am troubled by the deterioration of the human rights 
environment in China. During my time as Acting Assistant Secretary, I 
have regularly condemned human rights violations and abuses in China, 
and raised and advocated for individual cases of concern with Chinese 
counterparts. With regard to the Philippines, the U.S. and the 
Philippines have a deep and broad relationship that has been a 
cornerstone of peace and stability in the region for over 70 years. It 
is built on shared values, and shared sacrifice for democracy. We 
should encourage greater respect for human rights, fundamental 
freedoms, and the rule of law, and believe that these obligations 
promote long-term security. I remain deeply concerned by reports of 
extrajudicial killings associated with the drug war. The United States 
has expressed concerns with the prosecution of the drug war on multiple 
occasions with the Philippine Government, and we should continue to do 
so. We should also continue strongly urging the Philippines to ensure 
its law enforcement efforts are carried out consistent with its human 
rights obligations.

    Question 4. Can you please explain in concrete terms what that 
means with respect to human rights in China, and two or three examples 
that you have acted on it?

    Answer. During my time as Acting Assistant Secretary, I regularly 
condemned human rights violations and abuses in China, and raised and 
advocated for individual cases of concerns with Chinese counterparts. 
At consecutive sessions of the United Nations Human Rights Council 
since February 2017, I ensured the United States raised our concerns 
publicly about reports of China's arbitrary detention and torture of 
lawyers and activists, constraints on civil society and religious 
practices, discrimination against/human rights abuses with respect to 
the denial of rights to Tibetans and Uighurs, the crackdown on peaceful 
political expression, and reprisals against human rights activists. In 
March 2017, I reviewed and approved how the Department of State's 
annual Human Rights Report detailed the continued widespread abuses of 
human rights and fundamental freedoms in China. Later that month, 
Secretary Tillerson made his first visit to China, during which he and 
I made clear that the United States would continue to advocate for 
human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion 
and belief, universal values such as human rights and religious 
freedom. The following month, on the sidelines of the U.S.-China summit 
at Mar-a-Lago, I raised specific human rights cases of concerns with 
Chinese counterparts. In April 2017, we secured the release of an 
American businesswoman from Houston who had been in prolonged pretrial 
detention in China for over two years, one of several American citizens 
I have personally helped to overcome exit bans.
    Over the past year, I have also supported Department of State 
officials' attendance at the Chinese trials and sentencings of numerous 
human rights lawyers and activists who have reportedly faced serious 
mistreatment and torture while in detention, and private meetings 
privately with the wives and family members of those who have been 
detained. I have directed the drafting of Department of State 
statements marking the passing of Chinese Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 
Liu Xiaobo, the two-year anniversary of the launch of the Chinese 
Government's nationwide campaign of intimidation against defense 
lawyers and rights defenders, and the detention of Swedish citizen and 
Hong Kong bookseller Gui Minhai. I also approved the publication by our 
Embassy of a statement on International Human Rights Day, and a joint 
statement with the German Embassy on the sentencing of Chinese human 
rights defenders Wu Gan and Xie Yang.
    Among our most intensive efforts this year to advance our human 
rights agenda in China was our effort to secure Liu Xiaobo's freedom. 
In June 2017, the Department of State called on China to allow Liu 
Xiaobo access to international medical specialists and to be allowed to 
seek medical treatment abroad. In July, under my leadership, the Bureau 
of East Asian and Pacific Affairs arranged for a leading American 
cancer specialist to travel to Shenyang to visit and treat Liu, and 
reiterate calls for his ability to seek medical treatment abroad. 
Following Liu's passing, the Secretary released a statement calling for 
the release from house arrest of Liu's widow, Liu Xia, and her ability 
to depart China. If confirmed, I will continue to lead persistent 
public and private efforts to press for Liu Xia's ability to 
communicate freely and travel, including abroad.
    In December, the United States took action to promote 
accountability for serious human rights abuses in China by designating 
a former Chinese prison official under the December 2017 Executive 
Order implementing the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability 
Act. Moreover, we have used our high-level meetings with the Chinese to 
raise U.S. concerns around issues such as China's foreign NGO 
management law, exit bans placed on U.S. citizens, and specific 
detentions of Chinese activists. I, and my colleagues in the Bureau of 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs, have met regularly with Chinese human 
rights lawyers and activists such as Chen Guangcheng, leaders of non-
government and non-profit organizations promoting greater respect for 
human rights in China such as Dui Hua Foundation founder John Kamm, and 
members of ethnic and religious minority groups such as World Uighur 
Congress president Dolkun Isa and Tibetan filmmaker Dhondup Wangchen. 
If confirmed, I will continue to raise our concerns about China's human 
rights issues, both in our private conversations and publicly, and 
encourage greater respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, and 
the rule of law in China.

    Question 5. What points of leverage do you think the U.S. has, and 
what points would you be willing to use, to obtain freedom for Liu Xia, 
the widow of 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo?

    Answer. The United States remains deeply concerned about Liu Xia's 
well-being and freedom. I have helped lead persistent public and 
private high-level efforts to press for Liu Xia's ability to 
communicate freely and travel, including abroad. If confirmed, I will 
continue to review and make use of all tools at my disposal to press 
for Liu Xia's well-being and freedom of movement, including her freedom 
of expression and freedom to travel abroad as she chooses.

    Question 6. The administration's National Security Strategy focuses 
largely on China, but only references human rights once. Do you think 
this sends a message to China and the region that the administration is 
not concerned about the issue?

    Answer. Promoting respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms, including freedom of religion, remains a key component of 
American foreign policy. The President's National Security Strategy 
identifies as one of its four pillars the need to continue to advance 
America's influence abroad to protect our security and ensure our 
prosperity. Our advancement of democracy, human rights, and the rule of 
law have contributed to the success story of the Indo-Pacific region 
over the last half century, and if confirmed, I will continue to uphold 
and work to move forward these fundamental U.S. values in the region.
Taiwan
    Question 7. As you know, I am the co-chair of the Senate Taiwan 
Caucus and last week, the Senate Foreign Relations committee reported 
out of committee the Taiwan Travel Act which would encourage high-level 
engagement for U.S. officials to meet their Taiwan counter-parts.

   Do you agree that supporting high-level U.S. engagement with Taiwan 
        is in our national security interest?

    Answer. Taiwan has long been a vital U.S. partner, a democratic 
success story, and a force for good in the world. Taiwan shares U.S. 
values, has earned our respect, and continues to merit strong U.S. 
support.
    Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act, United States officials 
regularly visit Taiwan to advance our unofficial relationship through 
the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic and 
Cultural Representative Office (TECRO), and vice versa. If confirmed, I 
would seek and consider opportunities for visits to Washington and 
Taipei by senior-level authorities that advance our unofficial 
relationship and enable substantive exchanges on issues of mutual 
interest and concern.

    Question 8. Should U.S. restrictions on visits between officials 
from the U.S. and Taiwan be removed or revised? If not, why should they 
remain in place?

    Answer. Under the umbrella of our unofficial relationship, the 
United States and Taiwan conduct, through the American Institute in 
Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office 
in the United States (TECRO), a broad range of normal interactions, 
including arms sales, visits, trade negotiations, and education and 
cultural exchanges.
    Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act, U.S. officials regularly 
visit Taiwan to advance our unofficial relationship through AIT and 
TECRO, and vice versa.

    Question 9. Around the world, we have seen Taiwan's diplomatic 
channels close due to undue Chinese pressure in multiple capitols. We 
have witnessed Chinese warplanes fly over Taiwan and the use of 
commercial jets to violate airspace agreements.

   If confirmed, how do you plan to support our democratic partner in 
        countering undue Chinese influence?

    Answer. The United States has long maintained that cross-Strait 
differences are matters to be resolved peacefully, without the threat 
or use of force or coercion, and in a manner acceptable to the people 
on both sides of the Taiwan Strait. There is no change in our position. 
My commitments and assurances to Taiwan, including faithful 
implementation of the Taiwan Relations Act, are firm and long-standing.
    The United States has an enduring interest in cross-Strait peace 
and stability. I would encourage authorities in Beijing and Taipei to 
engage in constructive dialogue that seeks a peaceful resolution of 
differences acceptable to the people of both sides of the Taiwan Strait 
on the basis of dignity and respect. If confirmed, I would oppose to 
unilateral actions by either side to alter the status quo across the 
Strait.
South China Sea
    Question 10. I remain very concerned about China's long-term 
strategic intent and by China's aggressive program of land reclamation 
in the South China Sea over the past several years, including the 
placement of additional military assets on Woody Island in the 
Paracels, and the building of infrastructure in the Spratlys that could 
easily be turned to military use. China's continued efforts to coerce 
other claimants and change the status quo in waters claimed by the 
Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Brunei and Malaysia -demands a 
powerful U.S. response.

   Beyond the conduct of freedom of navigation operations, which is 
        the purview of the Department of Defense, what should U.S. 
        strategy be in the South China Sea? Past diplomatic efforts 
        that called for self-restraint, no dredging and no 
        militarization have obviously failed.

    Answer. The United States should work with partners and allies to 
uphold the rules-based order throughout the region, including in the 
South China Sea. We should continue to insist that China and others 
respect international law in their approach to South China Sea 
disputes. We should to press China and all the South China Sea 
claimants to refrain from new construction on, and militarization of, 
disputed features, and to commit to managing and resolving disputes 
peacefully, without the threat or use of force or coercion. With 
respect to their maritime claims and activities, we should continue to 
engage both publicly and privately with all South China Sea claimants, 
including China, to eliminate restrictions to freedoms of navigation 
and overflight and other lawful uses of the sea that do not conform to 
international law as reflected in the Law of the Sea Convention. We 
also need to urge both China and other claimants to conclude a 
meaningful Code of Conduct for the South China Sea.
    We should keep engaging our allies and partners bilaterally and 
through plurilateral and in multilateral fora, including ASEAN, to 
advocate for respect for international law. As the primary multilateral 
institution in Southeast Asia, ASEAN has political weight greater than 
the sum of its parts, especially on contentious issues like those 
concerning the South China Sea. We should continue to encourage a 
unified ASEAN position that affirms and promotes the international 
rules and standards that underpin East Asian stability and prosperity. 
Additionally, ASEAN-centered institutions such as the East Asia 
Summit--in which the United States, China, and many regional allies and 
partners also participate--are additional venues in which we can play 
an active role to enhance respect for the rules-based order, including 
at the leaders level.

    Question 11. After the Olympics, the Vice President appeared to 
attempt to clarify our North Korea policy saying if the North Koreans 
want to talk, we'll talk. In Vancouver, Secretary Tillerson said that 
the North Koreans must demonstrate a commitment to denuclearization 
before talks can begin. President Trump has said the U.S. would be 
willing to talk ``under the right circumstances.''
    Under what specific conditions should the U.S. enter into 
negotiations with North Korea?

   An extended moratorium on North Korea missile and nuclear tests?
   An explicit declaration by Pyongyang that it will return to its 
        commitments under the September 2005 Six Party Talks agreement?

    Answer. The administration has stated an openness to talks with a 
credible partner. There has not been a credible indication from the 
North Korean regime that it wants to engage in meaningful dialogue. An 
announced and intentional moratorium from North Korea on missile and 
nuclear tests could be one way to demonstrate its readiness to talk. I 
don't believe the administration has any intention of returning to the 
mistakes of the past, and is mindful that North Korea has demonstrated 
its penchant for violating previous agreements.
Hong Kong
    Question 12. The U.S. has prided itself across different 
administrations in its support for democratic movements around the 
world. Yet it has been painfully quiet on Hong Kong, where the Chinese 
Government is methodically eroding Hong Kong's autonomy and the rights 
guaranteed to Hong Kong under the Basic Law.

   What steps has the administration taken the past year to counter 
        these developments, and what steps will it take to uphold Hong 
        Kong's autonomy?

    Answer. I share your concerns regarding the growing threats to One 
Country Two Systems, and pledge to support the defense of Hong Kong's 
high degree of autonomy.
    I firmly support, and will continue to advocate for, Hong Kong's 
highly developed rule of law, and respect for human rights and 
fundamental freedoms. I believe that societies are best served when 
diverse political views are protected and can be freely expressed.
    I believe that an open society, with the highest possible degree of 
autonomy and democratic participation, and governed by the rule of law, 
is essential for Hong Kong's stability and prosperity.
    The State Department has consistently called on the Central 
Government to honor its commitments to uphold the rule of law in Hong 
Kong, as well as to ensure lawful and procedural respect for the Basic 
Law. Hong Kong's highly respected rule of law system, the integrity of 
Hong Kong's legislature, and the independence of Hong Kong's judiciary, 
have been critical to the continued success of the Hong Kong Special 
Administrative Region.
    The June 2017 release of the State Department's ``Review of Key 
Developments in Hong Kong'' described several concerns related to the 
autonomy of Hong Kong and called on the Central Government to honor its 
commitments. State Department officials at all levels, including at 
Consulate General Hong Kong, regularly meet with government officials, 
activists, representatives from civil society, and private citizens to 
discuss a wide range of topics bearing on the interests of the United 
States and its friends and allies--foremost among them are Hong Kong's 
autonomy and human rights and fundamental freedoms.

    Question 13. If confirmed, would you support additional governance 
programming that supports the democratic movement in Hong Kong?

    Answer. Hong Kong's highly respected rule of law system, the 
integrity of Hong Kong's legislature, and the independence of Hong 
Kong's judiciary, have been critical to the continued success of the 
Hong Kong Special Administrative Region. If confirmed, I would support 
governance programming that strengthens the Hong Kong institutions that 
play critically important roles in protecting Hong Kong's high degree 
of autonomy and fundamental freedoms.

    Question 14. Do you believe the consensus view among more than 95 
percent of climate scientists that climate change is real and that 
combustion of fossil fuels, in combination with other anthropogenic 
activities that release greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, is 
causing climate change?

    Answer. President Trump made clear when the United States joined 
other G-20 countries in last year's G-20 Leaders' Declaration in 
stating that the administration remains committed to mitigating 
greenhouse gas emissions through, among other ways, increased 
innovation on sustainable and clean energy and energy efficiency, and 
working towards low greenhouse gas emissions energy systems. The United 
States will continue to support a balanced approach to climate 
mitigation, economic development, and energy security that takes into 
consideration the realities of the global energy mix. If confirmed, I 
will support the administration's commitment to continue helping our 
partner countries reduce emissions from forests and other lands, to 
adapt to the impacts of climate change, and to respond to natural 
disasters.

    Question 15. Given the significance of climate diplomacy to the 
U.S.-China relationship, and the significant investment that China is 
making at home and abroad in renewable energy development, will you 
work to restore the climate cooperation dialogue between the U.S. and 
China--a former cornerstone of the U.S.-China relationship?

    Answer. The United States seeks a constructive and results-oriented 
relationship with China, and as a leader in global energy, the United 
States is a critical force in advancing energy efficiency and clean 
energy efforts around the world as demand for energy increases. If 
confirmed, I will work to continue strengthening U.S. energy security 
and respond to energy challenges from around the region that affect 
U.S. economic policy and national security. I will also seek to broaden 
practical cooperation and achieve results on issues of shared concern 
in line with administration policy.
    If confirmed, I will have my bureau help promote an ``all of the 
above'' energy strategy focusing on secure, stable, diversified, and 
modern global energy systems that uses a broad range of market-based 
energy solutions, including renewable energy, advanced energy 
technologies, energy efficiency, oil and liquefied natural gas, and 
governance solutions, to advance U.S. interests, global energy 
security, and economic development.

    Question 16. Given how seriously every nation in the world take the 
threat of climate change, wherein every nation has committed to some 
degree to cut its carbon emissions, how will you aim to engage and 
convince China's neighbors to partner with the U.S. to meet their clean 
energy and energy self-reliance goals?

    Answer. The United States will continue to be a leader in clean 
energy and innovation, and we understand the need for transforming 
energy systems given the dynamic change in our own market in recent 
years. American businesses are at the forefront of innovation in the 
clean energy and energy efficiency technologies, and American workers 
are the best trained in the world. Our guiding principles should 
include universal access to affordable and reliable energy and open, 
competitive markets that promote efficiency and energy security. Over 
the past 10 years, the United States has shown that it can reduce 
emissions while growing the economy and promoting energy security. 
Since 2005, the United States' net greenhouse gas emissions have 
decreased 11.5 percent while the U.S. economy has grown 15 percent, 
adjusted for inflation. If confirmed, I will seek to engage with 
partners based on our track record of innovation and results.

    Question 17. If the President is serious about seeking a better 
deal for America under the Paris Agreement, how will conceding 
leadership to China result in outcomes that could objectively be seen 
as better for the U.S.?

    Answer. I believe the United States remains a leader in clean 
energy and innovation, and we are committed to lowering our greenhouse 
gas emissions through innovation to protect the environment while 
increasing economic growth. Over the past 10 years, the United States 
has shown that it can reduce emissions while growing the economy and 
promoting energy security. Since 2005, the United States' net 
greenhouse gas emissions have decreased 11.5 percent while the U.S. 
economy has grown 15 percent, adjusted for inflation.
Conflicts of Interest
    Question 18. If confirmed, you will be handling diplomatic 
relationships with countries that are significant U.S. trading 
partners. I am very concerned about possible conflicts of interest 
between our diplomacy and our President's overseas business 
arrangements. We know that the President owns assets in several 
countries. We also suspect that he has taken loans from foreign 
entities. But we still don't know the full extent of his holdings and 
the details of any foreign loans because he has not been fully 
transparent with the American people. The fact that China approved new 
trademarks for the Trump Organization and Ivanka Trump's company over 
the past year only underscores this point. One could imagine a 
situation where you, if confirmed, are negotiating an agreement with a 
country in which the President's business is trying to obtain 
trademarks, potentially presenting a conflict between what is in the 
financial interest of the President versus the economic interests of 
the American people at large.

   So my question to you is, without a public disclosure of the 
        President's business relationships how can you and the American 
        people know that your negotiations with other countries will 
        not benefit the President at the expense of ordinary Americans?
   And without a full public disclosure, how can you be sure that the 
        person you're negotiating with doesn't know more about the 
        President's business dealings than you do?

    Answer. I have consistently acted in the best interest of the 
United States Government and the American people throughout my 
government service and will continue to do so as Assistant Secretary if 
I am confirmed. I will never place the interests of any individual or 
company ahead of those of the American people.
    I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 19. During the U.S.-China Summit held last April in 
Florida and last November in Beijing, President Trump did not raise the 
question of respect for human rights and the rule of law in China and 
in Tibet. Since 1997, all U.S. Presidents have publicly challenged the 
sitting Chinese President to negotiate with the Dalai Lama or his 
representative to find a lasting solution to the Tibetan issue.

   Would you personally commit to pressing the Chinese leadership for 
        a resolution of the Tibetan issue through a speedy resumption 
        of dialogue with the Tibetan side, without preconditions?
   If appointed, would you recommend and make sure that President 
        Trump calls publicly on the Chinese President to address the 
        grievances of the Tibetan people through dialogue with the 
        Dalai Lama?

    Answer. I share your concerns about the lack of respect for human 
rights and rule of law in Tibet. If confirmed, I will urge Chinese 
authorities to engage in meaningful and direct dialogue with the Dalai 
Lama or his representatives, without preconditions, to lower tensions 
and resolve differences. I will also call on China to provide 
meaningful autonomy for Tibetans and cease restrictions on Tibetan 
religious, linguistic, and cultural practices, and speak out against 
Chinese Government interference in Tibetan religious matters, 
particularly the selection, education, and veneration of the 
reincarnate lamas who lead the faith. I will also recommend that the 
United States expresses publicly, and at the highest levels of 
government, U.S. concerns about restrictions on the rights of Tibetans 
and other ethnic and religious minorities in China and urge Chinese 
authorities to engage in meaningful and direct dialogue with the Dalai 
Lama or his representatives, without preconditions.
Chinese Political Prisoners
    Question 20. On behalf of Senator Schumer, from the great state of 
New York we wanted to ask you about Americans who have been detained in 
China. As of today, there are approximately 100 Americans detained or 
imprisoned in China. There are nearly 40 other Americans who are 
subject to ``exit bans'' and are therefore unable to leave China. 
Amongst those imprisoned is Li Kai, a New Yorker who was arrested by 
the Chinese authorities in September 2016 and has remained imprisoned 
in China.

   If confirmed, what are specific actions will you take as Assistant 
        Secretary to advocate for the prompt release Li Kai and all 
        other Americans imprisoned in China?

    Answer. The safety and security of U.S. citizens, including those 
who are detained in China, will be one my top priorities. I will do 
everything I can to protect the rights of U.S. citizens in China and 
elsewhere in the Asia-Pacific. When they are not, I will do everything 
I can to continually raise their cases with the Chinese. While we have 
managed in recent months to secure the return to the U.S. of several 
American citizens previously detained to subject to ``exit bans,'' I 
will certainly continue to advocate for progress on remaining cases. We 
have also recently added a new warning to our travel advisory for China 
regarding potential for arbitrary application of laws.
    I have been closely following the case of Li Kai, and I know the 
State Department, including our consulate in Shanghai, has been in 
regular contact with his family.
    This situation is extremely troubling, and we regularly raise Mr. 
Li's case with the Chinese. I have personally raised Mr. Li's case with 
high level Chinese officials, and if confirmed, I will continue to do 
so, advocating for Mr. Li's rights and urging China to return him home.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                Susan A. Thornton by Senator Marco Rubio

    Question 1. Our understanding from Wall Street Journal news reports 
and other sources is that the National Security Council convened a 
Policy Coordination committee conference call on Friday, May 26, 2017 
(hereinafter ``PCC conference call''), to discuss with NSC staff and 
other administration officials whether FBI agents should arrest or 
detain several officials from China's Ministry of State Security who 
had allegedly conducted official business while in the United States in 
violation of their transit visas, and whose plane was about to depart a 
New York airport. Did Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs Laura Stone (hereinafter ``Acting DAS 
Stone'') participate in this PCC conference call on May 26, 2017?

    Answer. I was out of the country on official travel on the date of 
the call. My understanding is that officials from USG agencies, 
including Acting DAS Stone, participated in an interagency secure call 
on May 26.
    While I did not participate in the meeting as I was on official 
travel, I was briefed in a secure environment on the details of this 
meeting when I returned. The State Department would be happy to provide 
a classified briefing as follow up to your question.
    I remain committed to protecting U.S. sovereignty, and to working 
closely with the law enforcement community to ensure the safety and 
security of the American people and that China does not engage in law 
enforcement activity in the United States without U.S. consent. If 
confirmed, I will continue to cooperate with interagency colleagues 
ensure China abides by President Xi's commitment to President Trump in 
Beijing in November to coordinate all law enforcement activities in the 
United States with U.S. authorities. I have pressed China to adhere to 
this commitment during my interactions with Chinese officials.

    Question 2. Did any other officials from the State Department, 
including the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs (hereinafter 
``EAP Bureau''), participate in this PCC conference call on May 26, 
2017? If yes, who?

    Answer. My understanding is that officials from several other 
bureaus from the State Department participated as well as many other 
interagency representatives.

    Question 3. During the PCC conference call on May 26, 2017, did 
Acting DAS Stone or any other EAP Bureau officials oppose, object to, 
or otherwise not support proposals for FBI agents to arrest or detain 
several officials from China's Ministry of State Security at a New York 
airport who had allegedly conducted official business while in the 
United States in violation of their transit visas?

    Answer. I believe we should be extremely concerned about actions by 
foreign officials in the United States that would be inconsistent with 
U.S. sovereignty, and we should take action to address this issue. My 
understanding is that in this, and in similar cases, the State 
Department advocated for a strong and appropriate response, consistent 
with Vienna Conventions and in a manner that supports and upholds U.S. 
interests.

    Question 4. Did you convey, in any way and at any time, any 
guidance or direction to Acting DAS Stone or any other EAP Bureau 
officials as to what position, posture, and/or actions the State 
Department in general or the EAP Bureau in specific should take in the 
PCC conference call on May 26, 2017, with regard to whether FBI agents 
should arrest or detain several officials from China's Ministry of 
State Security at a New York airport who had allegedly conducted 
official business while in the United States in violation of their 
transit visas? If yes, please describe your guidance or direction?

    Answer. No, as I was out of the country on official travel at that 
time.

    Question 5. If your answer to the previous question is no, please 
explain why not, especially given your position as Acting Assistant 
Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and your 
responsibility for the EAP Bureau's official actions? And did you 
deputize any other State Department employee to act in your absence?

    Answer. I did not participate in this impromptu working-level 
interagency call as I was on official travel out of the country.

    Question 6. Will you provide us with the Statement of Conclusions 
for the PCC conference call on May 26, 2017?

    Answer. My understanding is that as this was an impromptu 
interagency secure call, and therefore there was no formal Statement of 
Conclusions issued.
On Subsequent PCC Meeting to Discuss the May 26th Outcome
    Question 7. As we understand from Wall Street Journal news reports 
and other sources, the National Security Council convened in the 
following week a Policy Coordination committee meeting (hereinafter 
``PCC meeting'') to discuss, among other things related to U.S.-China 
relations, the outcome of the May 26th PCC conference call. Did you 
attend this subsequent PCC meeting?

    Answer. No. I also did not participate in the meeting, due to 
subsequent official travel.

    Question 8. During this subsequent PCC meeting, did you oppose, 
object to, or otherwise not support efforts to lay out a specific 
policy, plan of action, or other interagency understanding if the FBI 
should once again find itself either in the position to arrest or 
detain Chinese officials conducting official business in violation of 
their transit visas, or in another comparable situation?

    Answer. I did not participate in the meeting as I was on official 
travel. I was briefed in a secure environment on the details of this 
meeting when I returned.
    I remain committed to protecting U.S. sovereignty, and to working 
closely with the law enforcement community to ensure the safety and 
security of the American people and that China does not engage in law 
enforcement activity in the United States without U.S. consent. If 
confirmed, I will continue to cooperate with interagency colleagues 
ensure China abides by President Xi's commitment to President Trump in 
Beijing in November to coordinate all law enforcement activities in the 
United States with U.S. authorities. I have pressed China to adhere to 
this commitment during my interactions with Chinese officials.

    Question 9. During this PCC meeting, did you express or otherwise 
convey the view that the United States should not be confrontational 
towards China?

    Answer. I did not personally participate in the meeting as I was on 
official travel.
    I am committed to a clear-eyed and forthright approach to China. If 
confirmed, my approach will be to ensure that where we have 
differences, the U.S. Government confronts China directly.

    Question 10. Will you provide us with the Statement of Conclusions 
for the PCC meeting to discuss the outcome of May 26th PCC conference 
call?

    Answer. I am not aware of a Statement of Conclusions issued by the 
National Security Council for this meeting.

    Question 11. In February 2017, a group of 11 democratic 
governments--with whom the United States has historically partnered to 
advance human rights issues in China--sent a letter to the Chinese 
Minister of Public Security on the issue of torture and the secret 
detention of dozens of human rights lawyers (hereinafter ``February 
2017 letter''). The United States declined to sign the February 2017 
letter, which prompted an onslaught of negative media attention and 
unfortunately furthered the narrative that, in the words of the 
Washington Post editorial board, ``the Trump administration will play 
down human rights in its foreign policy.'' Please describe the State 
Department's decision-making process in making a recommendation on 
whether or not the United States should sign the February 2017 letter?

   Did you unilaterally make the decision on whether or not the State 
        Department should support the United States signing the 
        February 2017 letter? If yes, why?
   If your answer to the previous question is no, then did you make 
        any recommendation to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson or to 
        any other senior State Department official on whether or not 
        the United States should sign the February 2017 letter? If yes, 
        then what recommendation did you make and to whom did you 
        convey the recommendation? And did you consult with the Bureau 
        of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (hereinafter ``DRL'') on 
        any such recommendation?

    Answer. The United States has repeatedly raised concerns over 
China's deteriorating human rights situation with Chinese officials 
through many different mechanisms and, if I am confirmed, I will work 
hard to ensure that we continue to do so. At the 34th session of the 
United Nations Human Rights Council in February 2017, the United States 
raised our concerns publicly about reports of China's arbitrary 
detention and torture of lawyers and activists. We also raised concerns 
about reports of torture in China in detail in the State Department's 
annual Human Rights Report on China released the following month. On 
the sidelines of the U.S.-China summit at Mar-a-Lago in April 2017, 
senior U.S. Department of State officials raised human rights prisoner 
cases of concern with Chinese counterparts. Over the past year, 
Department of State officials have attended the trials and sentencings 
of numerous human rights lawyers and activists who have reportedly 
faced serious mistreatment and torture while in detention, and met 
privately with their wives and family members. In July 2017, the 
Department of State marked the two-year anniversary of the launch of 
the Chinese Government's nationwide campaign of intimidation against 
defense lawyers and rights defenders and raised concerns about reports 
of their alleged torture and denial of access to independent legal 
counsel. In December, we took action to promote accountability for 
serious human rights abuses in China, in particular the detention and 
torture of human rights activist Cao Shunli, by designating a former 
Chinese prison official under the December 2017 Executive Order 
implementing the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. The 
following month, we released a joint statement with the German Embassy 
in Beijing on the sentencing of human rights defenders Wu Gan and Xie 
Yang, in which we publicly condemned the allegations of their serious 
mistreatment. We should welcome other countries speaking out on this 
issue as well, and, if confirmed, I will continue to look for 
opportunities to work with like-minded countries to address China's 
human rights abuses. I am firmly committed to opposing torture and 
other human rights violations and abuses in China and elsewhere in the 
world.
    As with all policy matters under consideration at the Department of 
State, arriving at consensus positions is a primary goal, and I have 
certainly not made any policies unilaterally. The decision by the U.S. 
Government not to join the February 2017 letter was related to timing 
and the recent arrival of a new administration, rather than any lack of 
commitment or disagreement about substance.

    Question 12. During your time in the State Department's Bureau of 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs (hereinafter ``EAP Bureau''), has Joshua 
Wong ever requested to meet with you?

    Answer. It is my understanding that Joshua Wong has not requested a 
meeting with me in the past. Officers from the EAP Bureau and other 
parts of the State Department, both in Washington, D.C. and in Hong 
Kong, however, have met with Joshua Wong on multiple occasions, just as 
they have with many other Hong Kong citizens of influence across the 
political spectrum. If confirmed, I would stand ready to meet with Hong 
Kong citizens from across the political spectrum, including democracy 
activists like Joshua Wong. I would also instruct Consulate General 
Hong Kong to do the same.

    Question 13. During your time in the EAP Bureau, have you ever met 
with Joshua Wong? If not, why not?

    Answer. I have not personally met with Joshua Wong, but me officers 
from the EAP Bureau and other parts of the State Department, both in 
Washington, D.C. and in Hong Kong, however, have met with Joshua Wong 
on multiple occasions, just as they have with many other Hong Kong 
citizens of influence across the political spectrum. If confirmed, I 
would stand ready to meet with Hong Kong citizens from across the 
political spectrum, including democracy activists, like Joshua Wong. I 
would also instruct Consulate General Hong Kong to do the same.

    Question 14. During your time in the EAP Bureau, have you met with 
any Hong Kong-based pro-democracy advocates? How many and with whom in 
particular?

    Answer. I, and/or members of my teams, have met with Anson Chan, 
Martin Lee, Dennis Kwok, Joshua Wong, Jeffrey Ngo, and others. State 
Department officials at all levels, including at Consulate General Hong 
Kong, regularly meet with Hong Kong Government officials, activists, 
representatives from civil society, and private citizens to discuss a 
wide range of topics bearing on the interests of the United States 
including human rights, fundamental freedoms, and democracy. If 
confirmed, I would stand ready to meet with Hong Kong citizens from 
across the political spectrum, including democracy activists, and would 
instruct Consulate General Hong Kong to do the same.
    The United States firmly supports Hong Kong's high degree of 
autonomy, rule of law, and respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms. We recognize the Sino-British Joint Declaration and the Basic 
Law as the bedrock of Hong Kong's autonomy under ``one country, two 
systems.'' We support freedom of expression and believe that societies 
are best served when diverse political views are respected and can be 
freely expressed. If confirmed, I will continue to promote these 
priorities through our engagement with the Government and people of 
Hong Kong, as well as the Chinese Central Government.

    Question 15. If confirmed, do you commit to meeting with Joshua 
Wong, Agnes Chow, and other young pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would stand ready to meet with Hong 
Kong citizens from across the political spectrum, including democracy 
activists, and I would instruct Consulate General Hong Kong to do the 
same.

    Question 16. If confirmed, do you commit to instructing U.S. Consul 
General to Hong Kong Kurt Tong to meeting with Joshua Wong, Agnes Chow, 
and other young pro-democracy activists in Hong Kong?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will instruct Consulate General Hong 
Kong to meet with Hong Kong citizens from across the political 
spectrum, including young pro-democracy activists.

    Question 17. If confirmed, do you commit to instructing U.S. Consul 
General to Hong Kong Kurt Tong to send a clear message that the United 
States will not tolerate China's erosion of the ``one country, two 
systems'' model?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue to have the United 
States voice our concerns, including through Consulate General Hong 
Kong, over any actions by the Chinese Central Government that appear 
inconsistent with China's commitment in the Basic Law to allow Hong 
Kong to exercise a high degree of autonomy under the ``one country, two 
systems'' framework. If confirmed, I will also continue to urge China 
to respect these principles as enshrined in the Sino-British Joint 
Declaration and the Basic Law.

    Question 18. Anson Chan recently said that Hong Kong is the 
``canary in the coal mine'' for rule of law, political rights and 
freedom of expression in China, all of which are essential also to 
protecting U.S. economic interests as well as the interest of American 
businesses operating in China. What actions can the U.S. Consulate 
General in Hong Kong take to demonstrate American support for Hong 
Kong's autonomy and for fundamental freedoms-including academic 
freedom, freedom of expression, freedom of assembly-in Hong Kong?

    Answer. The United States has firmly supported Hong Kong's high 
degree of autonomy, rule of law, and respect for human rights and 
fundamental freedoms. The State Department supports freedom of 
expression and believes that societies are best served when diverse 
political views are protected and can be freely expressed.
    The State Department believes that an open society, with the 
highest possible degree of autonomy and democratic participation, and 
governed by the rule of law, is essential for Hong Kong's stability and 
prosperity.
    If confirmed, I will continue to urge the Chinese Central 
Government to honor its commitments to uphold the rule of law in Hong 
Kong, as well as to ensure respect for the Basic Law. Hong Kong's 
highly respected rule of law system, the integrity of Hong Kong's 
legislature, and the independence of Hong Kong's judiciary, have been 
critical to the continued success of the Hong Kong Special 
Administrative Region.
    The State Department and our Consulate General Hong Kong have been 
very active in demonstrating American support for these ideals both in 
private and in public --such as through the June 2017 release of the 
``Review of Key Developments in Hong Kong'' that described several 
concerns related to the autonomy of Hong Kong and called on the Central 
Government to honor its commitments. If confirmed, I would instruct 
Consulate General Hong Kong and State Department officials at all 
levels to continue to engage privately and publicly with Hong Kong and 
Central Government officials and institutions in support of Hong Kong's 
autonomy and fundamental freedoms. I would also support governance 
programming that strengthens the Hong Kong institutions that play 
critically important roles in protecting Hong Kong's high degree of 
autonomy and fundamental freedoms.

    Question 19. The Trump administration has emphasized the concept of 
reciprocity in our dealings with China. What are your views on the 
principle of reciprocity in the context of U.S.-China relations?

    Answer. In order to realign and rebalance our relationship with 
China, there needs to be significant changes in China's behavior 
bilaterally, regionally, and globally in important security, 
diplomatic, and economic areas. In particular, China must enact a more 
fair and reciprocal trade and investment relationship with the United 
States. China should play by the same rules and standards the United 
States and other countries are expected to follow, whether that be 
human rights for people in their territory, trade and investment, or 
international law.
    In our efforts to promote reciprocity, I believe that the United 
States must remain consistent with our own values such as respect for 
the rule of law, respect for U.S. sovereignty, and transparency.

    Question 20. During your time in the State Department's Bureau of 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs (hereinafter ``EAP Bureau''), what 
specific policy proposals have you supported at the Department to 
actualize the idea of bringing greater reciprocity to America's 
relationship with China?

    Answer. In order to realign and rebalance our relationship with 
China, there must be significant changes in China's behavior 
bilaterally, regionally, and globally in important security, 
diplomatic, and economic areas. To ensure reciprocity for the open 
access China and many other countries enjoy in the United States, I 
have strongly supported efforts to gain better access in China for U.S. 
businesses and products, foreign journalists, non-governmental 
organizations, and religious organizations.

    Question 21. During your time in the EAP Bureau, what specific 
proposals with regard to bring greater reciprocity to America's 
relationship with China have you blocked or otherwise not support from 
moving forward?

    Answer. In order to realign and rebalance our relationship with 
China, there must be significant changes in China's behavior 
bilaterally, regionally, and globally in important security, 
diplomatic, and economic areas. To ensure reciprocity for the open 
access China and many other countries enjoy in the United States, I 
have strongly supported efforts to gain better access in China for U.S. 
businesses and products, foreign journalists, non-governmental 
organizations, and religious organizations. As an example, I have 
advocated in the past for journalists visas and duration of stay in 
China, reciprocal treatment for restrictions on movements of diplomatic 
personnel, access for official personnel to the Tibetan Autonomous 
Region, and in many other fields, including requests for legal 
assistance, market access, etc. I am not aware of having blocked any 
such proposals. In our efforts to promote reciprocity, I believe that 
the United States must remain consistent with our own values. I would 
not support any efforts that violate our laws, sovereignty, or the 
Constitution.

    Question 22. The Chinese Government wields its ability to grant or 
deny visas to international scholars, journalists, civil society 
representatives, diplomats and others as a weapon. Academics who try to 
tackle politically sensitive topics find themselves banned from 
entering China for years at a time-a virtual death blow to the careers 
of young scholars while Chinese scholars experience no such similar 
restrictions in attempts to enter the United States. In a similar vein 
Members of Congress who are outspoken critics of the Chinese Government 
find their visas denied or delayed to the point of making a trip 
ineffectual, while at the same time that Chinese Government officials 
and Chinese Communist Party officials are routinely granted visas and 
granted access to all parts of the United the States. Diaspora 
communities, such as Tibetan-Americans, find their requests to travel 
to Tibet repeatedly denied while Chinese Government officials and 
Chinese Communist Party officials who implement repressive policies 
against these same ethnic minority regions travel freely in the United 
States. Chinese-funded think tanks in the United States abound while 
American non-governmental organizations (``NGOs'') and think tanks find 
their activities further restricted under the recently-passed foreign 
NGO management law. Do you agree with this assessment?

    Answer. I am committed to working towards ensuring that U.S. civil 
society, media, legislators, and scholars have full access to China.
    Executive Order 13780, which was signed by the President last 
March, requires the Department of State to undertake a worldwide review 
of nonimmigrant visa reciprocity agreements and arrangements. The 
Department noted discrepancies between the U.S. visa regime and China's 
and signaled to the Chinese that our visa agreements must be 
reciprocal. The Department is preparing now to take the steps necessary 
to make our visa regimes reciprocal including for validity and fees, 
consistent with INA Sections 221(c) and 281.
    Regarding Chinese officials' ability to travel to the United 
States, U.S. consular officers adjudicate visas on a case-by-case basis 
in accordance with U.S. law and regulations, including for those 
applicants who are government officials of a foreign country. The State 
Department regularly denies travel if it is not in the interests of the 
United States.

    Question 23. Do you agree that this assessment reflects a lack of 
reciprocity in the U.S.-China relationship, especially as it relates to 
visas?

    Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to continue working towards 
ensuring that U.S. civil society, media, legislators, and scholars have 
full access to China, and that reciprocity is observed. The Department 
has pursued a policy of reciprocity with regard to visas with China and 
has held annual consular dialogues towards this end.
    President Trump signed Executive Order 13780, requiring the 
Department of State to undertake a worldwide review of nonimmigrant 
visa reciprocity agreements and arrangements. EAP's posts are currently 
reviewing all visa agreements with foreign countries, including Mission 
China. During an initial review of the information provided by China, 
we noted discrepancies between its visa regime and ours. We have 
signaled to the Chinese that our visa agreements must be reciprocal and 
are preparing now to take the steps necessary to make our visa regimes 
reciprocal, including for validity and fees, consistent with INA 
Sections 221(c) and 281.
    Regarding Chinese officials ability to travel to the United States, 
U.S. consular officers adjudicate visas on a case-by-case basis in 
accordance to U.S. law and regulation, including for those applicants 
who are government officials of a foreign country. The State Department 
regularly denies travel if we feel it is not in the interests of the 
United States.

    Question 24. What steps could the State Department take to signal 
to the Chinese Government that the U.S. is prepared to act in its own 
best interest and that reciprocity will underpin future visa 
considerations? Are you prepared to lead such an effort if confirmed?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the Bureau of Consular 
Affairs to ensure that the United States' visa regime is reciprocal, 
consistent with the requirements in Immigration and Nationality Act 
Sections 281 and 221(c), respectively.
    Under Executive Order 13780, the State Department is reviewing 
China's visa policies as part of a worldwide review of nonimmigrant 
visa reciprocity. China is aware that, should visas offered to U.S. 
citizens not be considered reciprocal with what we offer to Chinese 
travelers, the United States will insist that changes be made to make 
them reciprocal. If confirmed, I will fully support such efforts and 
measures.

    Question 25. If confirmed, are you prepared to recommend the denial 
of visas to Chinese officials who oversee policies in places like the 
Tibet Autonomous Region and/or the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 
until American diplomats, journalists and NGOs are granted reciprocal 
access to these areas?

    Answer. I am committed to working towards ensuring that U.S. civil 
society, media, legislators, and scholars have full access to China.
    Regarding Chinese officials ability to travel to the United States, 
U.S. consular officers adjudicate visas on a case-by-case basis in 
strict accordance to U.S. law and regulation, including for those 
applicants who are government officials of a foreign country. The State 
Department regularly denies travel if we feel it is not in the 
interests of the United States.

    Question 26. During your confirmation hearing on , I raised 
concerns about the removal of the Taiwanese flag from various webpages 
on the State Department's website-including the Bureau of East Asian 
and Pacific Affairs' webpage on Taiwan at https://www.state.gov/p/eap/
ci/taiwan/ as well as the Bureau of Consular Affairs' webpage on Taiwan 
at https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/csi--repository/csi--
landing/csi--catalog/twn.html-beginning sometime in 2017. When 
specifically were Taiwanese flags removed from these webpages of the 
State Department's website?

    Answer. The two websites cited were updated to remove Taiwan's 
flag, in accordance with long-standing policy on the unofficial nature 
of U.S.-Taiwan relations, on August 2017 and January 2018 respectively.

    Question 27. Did you order, offer guidance on, or personally take 
any actions to implement, the removal of Taiwanese flags from these 
webpages on the State Department's website?

    Answer. I believe Taiwan is a vital partner, a democratic success 
story, and a force for good in the world. Taiwan shares our values, has 
earned our respect, and merits our strong support.
    As the acting senior official in the Bureau of East Asian and 
Pacific Affairs, all decisions made by the bureau are my 
responsibility. The two websites cited were updated to remove Taiwan's 
flag, in accordance with long-standing policy on the unofficial nature 
of U.S.-Taiwan relations.
    The United States' one China policy is based on the three joint 
communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). If confirmed, I commit 
to continuing to uphold that policy.

    Question 28. What specific role did you, in your capacity as Acting 
Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, play 
in the State Department's removal of the Taiwanese flag from the Bureau 
of East Asian and Pacific Affairs' webpage on Taiwan at https://
www.state.gov/p/eap/ci/taiwan/?

    Answer. As the acting senior official in the Bureau of East Asian 
and Pacific Affairs, all decisions made by this bureau are my 
responsibility. The website cited was updated to remove Taiwan's flag, 
in accordance with long-standing policy on the unofficial nature of 
U.S.-Taiwan relations.
    During an annual update of this website in August 2017, the Bureau 
of East Asian and Pacific Affairs removed the Taiwan flag, as including 
it was inconsistent with guidelines on relations with Taiwan 
prohibiting the display of symbols of sovereignty of the ``Republic of 
China'' (ROC).
    The ``U.S. Bilateral Relations Fact Sheet'' on this website 
contains extensive information about the United States' robust 
relationship with Taiwan and Taiwan's positive role in the 
international community.
    The United States' one China policy is based on the three joint ues 
and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). If confirmed, I commit to 
continuing to uphold that policy.
    Taiwan is a vital partner, a democratic success story, and a force 
for good in the world. Taiwan shares our values, has earned our 
respect, and continues to merit our strong support.

    Question 29. In your testimony before the committee, you said ``our 
policy is to not display the flag of the R.O.C. on U.S. official 
government websites.'' The March 4, 2011, memorandum from the State 
Department on ``Guidelines on Relations with Taiwan'' (hereinafter the 
``March 2011 Guidelines Memo'') contains no provisions regarding 
Taiwan's flag, however. When was this new policy (in your words) ``to 
not display the flag of the R.O.C. on U.S. official government 
websites'' established?

    Answer. The March 2011 Guidelines memo was revised in October 2015 
to better reflect long-standing U.S. policy regarding the display of 
the Taiwan flag.The United States' one China policy is based on the 
three joint communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). If 
confirmed, I commit to continuing to uphold that policy.
    Taiwan is a vital partner, a democratic success story, and a force 
for good in the world. Taiwan shares our values, has earned our 
respect, and continues to merit our strong support.

    Question 30. Did you author, approve, support, or otherwise play a 
role in formulating, the new policy to effectuate the removal of 
Taiwan's flag from the State Department's website and other U.S. 
Government websites?

    Answer. Not displaying the Taiwan flag, including on U.S. 
Government websites, is consistent with the United States' long-
standing policy given the unofficial nature of U.S.-Taiwan relations.

    Question 31. Was the removal of Taiwan's flag from the State 
Department's website pursuant to a new State Department memo circulated 
in 2015 (hereinafter ``the 2015 Guidelines memo) that supersedes the 
March 2011 Guidelines Memo?

    Answer. Yes. The removal of the Taiwan flag from U.S. Government 
websites is consistent with the United States' long-standing policy on 
the unofficial nature of U.S.-Taiwan relations.

    Question 32. Did you author, co-author, approve, or otherwise play 
a role in formulating, the 2015 Guidelines Memo that supersedes the 
March 2011 Guidelines Memo on U.S. relations with Taiwan?

    Answer. As the then Deputy Assistant Secretary responsible for 
China and Taiwan, I was part of the U.S. Government interagency process 
that formulated the 2015 guidelines memo that better reflects 
longstanding U.S. policy.
    The United States' one China policy is based on the three joint 
communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). If confirmed, I commit 
to continuing to uphold that policy.

    Question 33. Will you provide us with a copy of the 2015 Guidelines 
Memo and any other memo that supersedes the March 2011 Guidelines Memo 
on U.S. relations with Taiwan?

    Answer. Per the Department's standard practice, I would be happy to 
have my team share the memo referenced above with your staff in camera 
and answer any questions they may have.

    Question 34. Last year, I, along with Senators Menendez, Gardner 
and others, re-introduced the Taiwan Travel Act to encourage visits 
between American and Taiwanese officials at all levels of government, 
including officials from the State Department and the Defense 
Department. Do you believe the current restrictions on meetings with 
high-level Taiwanese officials are obstacles to addressing many of the 
challenges that we face in the region and would you support reviewing 
and updating the State Department's guidance to allow more official 
visits between the U.S. and Taiwan?

    Answer. Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), U.S. 
officials regularly visit Taiwan to advance our unofficial relationship 
through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic 
and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO), and vice versa. If 
confirmed, I will seek and consider opportunities for visits to 
Washington and Taipei by senior-level officials and authorities that 
advance our unofficial relationship and enable substantive exchanges on 
issues of mutual concern.
    There has been high-level engagement, facilitated, as deemed 
appropriate, by AIT and TECRO. For example, in September 2017, EPA 
Administrator Scott Pruitt met with Ying-yuan Lee of the Taiwan 
authorities to exchange views on our collaboration under the 
International Environmental Partnership (IEP). In July 2017, Veterans 
Affairs Secretary Shulkin received Taiwan's Veterans Affairs Council 
minister. In April 2014, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 
Administrator Gina McCarthy traveled to Taipei to highlight 20 years of 
environmental cooperation between the United States and the Taiwan 
authorities. There have also been numerous exchanges between sub-
cabinet level U.S. officials and the Taiwan authorities.

    Question 35. During your confirmation hearing, I asked whether you 
would commit to encouraging high-level visits between senior U.S. 
Government officials to meet with their Taiwanese counterparts in 
Taipei. Your answer was non-committal, however, so I would request 
greater clarity on your position with an answer that begins with 
``yes'' or ``no'' to my question.

    Answer. Yes. In accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, U.S. 
officials regularly visit Taiwan to advance our unofficial relationship 
through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic 
and Cultural Representative Office (TECRO), and vice versa. If 
confirmed, I will seek and consider opportunities for visits to 
Washington and Taipei by senior-level authorities that advance our 
unofficial relationship and enable substantive exchanges on issues of 
mutual concern.

    Question 36. If confirmed, will you push for high-level Taiwanese 
officials to enter the United States under conditions that are 
appropriately respectful for the dignity of such high-level officials?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will seek and consider opportunities 
for visits to Washington and Taipei by senior-level authorities that 
advance our unofficial relationship and enable substantive exchanges on 
issues of mutual concern, consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act and 
our one China policy. Such visitors from Taiwan are treated in an 
appropriately respectful manner.
    The United States facilitates, from time to time, representatives 
of the Taiwan authorities to transit the United States. Such transits 
are undertaken out of consideration for the safety, comfort, 
convenience, and dignity of the passenger and are in keeping with our 
one China policy.

    Question 37. If there was an opportunity for the United States to 
deepen our relationship with senior members of Taiwan's Government, 
would you support such an opportunity?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will seek and consider opportunities 
to deepen our relationships with senior-level Taiwan counterparts that 
enable substantive exchanges on issues of mutual concern, consistent 
with the Taiwan Relations Act and our one China policy.
    Strengthening our long-standing friendship with the people on 
Taiwan has been a key element of U.S. policy toward Asia.

    Question 38. If President Tsai or Taiwan's Foreign Minister were 
visiting Hawaii, would you support them meeting with the Commander of 
U.S. Pacific Command to exchange views on important security matters in 
East Asia?

    Answer. Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), U.S. 
officials visit Taiwan to take concrete steps to advance our unofficial 
relationship through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and Taipei 
Economic and Cultural Representative Organization (TECRO), and vice 
versa.
    If confirmed, I will seek and consider opportunities for visits by 
senior-level authorities that advance our unofficial relationship and 
enable substantive exchanges on issues of mutual concern, consistent 
with the TRA and our one China policy.

    Question 39. Have you ever opposed, objected to, or otherwise not 
supported a proposal for Taiwan's president, foreign minister, or other 
senior official to meet with the Commander of U.S. Pacific Command in 
Hawaii?

    Answer. Consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), U.S. 
officials visit Taiwan to take concrete steps to advance our unofficial 
relationship through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and Taipei 
Economic and Cultural Representative Organization (TECRO), and vice 
versa.
    I have and, if confirmed, will continue to support interaction 
between U.S. and Taiwan senior-level authorities that advances our 
unofficial relationship and enable substantive exchanges on issues of 
mutual concern, consistent with the TRA and our one China policy.

    Question 40. Do you believe the ``Six Assurances'' provide the 
cornerstone for the basis for America's relationship with Taiwan?

    Answer. The United States has been firmly committed to the U.S. one 
China policy, the three joint communiques, and the Taiwan Relations 
Act. I believe the ``Six Assurances'' are also an integral part of the 
U.S. approach to Taiwan.

    Question 41. If confirmed, how do you plan to strengthen our 
security and economic partnership with Taiwan?

    Answer. Taiwan is a vital partner, a democratic success story, and 
a force for good in the world. Taiwan shares our values, has earned our 
respect, and continues to merit our strong support. The United States 
should remain firmly committed to its one China policy, based on the 
three U.S.-PRC joint communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA).
    Secretary Tillerson, in his January 2017 Senate confirmation 
process, reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to our one China policy and the 
December 2017 National Security Strategy further reiterated that 
commitment.
    If confirmed, and under the umbrella of our unofficial 
relationship, I will encourage the conduct, through the American 
Institute in Taiwan (AIT) and the Taipei Economic and Cultural 
Representative Office in the United States (TECRO), of a broad range of 
interactions, including arms sales, visits, trade discussions, and 
educational and cultural exchanges.
    The security of Taiwan is central to the security of the broader 
Indo-Pacific region and stable cross-Strait relations as essential to 
maintaining regional stability.
    If confirmed, I will remain fully committed to carrying out the 
TRA.
    We should also strengthen the two-way trade and investment 
relationship, including through dialogue in our Trade and Investment 
Framework Agreement (TIFA) process, so we can work together to bring 
resolution to long-standing areas of concern. The United States and 
Taiwan authorities are working closely through TIFA discussions, 
convened under the auspices of AIT and TECRO. The TIFA is the key forum 
for trade dialogue between the United States and Taiwan, as it provides 
an opportunity for both sides to find ways to further expand our trade 
and investment relationship.

    Question 42. What does the One-China Policy mean to you and do you 
believe that the United States has the right to define our own One-
China Policy?

    Answer. The United States' one China policy is based on the three 
joint communiques and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA).
    Our one China policy has helped ensure peace and stability across 
the Taiwan Strait and in the region for decades. This policy has 
enabled us to be a leader in maintaining robust unofficial relations 
with Taiwan while pursuing a constructive relationship with China.
    The TRA provides the framework for the United States and Taiwan to 
cooperate in a wide range of mutually beneficial areas including 
energy, the environment, and scientific research.
    Under the umbrella of our unofficial relationship, the United 
States and Taiwan conduct, through the American Institute in Taiwan 
(AIT) and the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the 
United States (TECRO), a broad range of interactions, including arms 
sales, visits, trade discussions, and educational and cultural 
exchanges.
    The long-standing friendship with the people on Taiwan remains a 
key element of U.S. Asia policy. The enduring relationship under the 
TRA represents a unique asset for the United States and is an important 
multiplier of our influence in the region. This friendship is grounded 
in history, shared values, and the common commitment to democracy, free 
markets, rule of law, and human rights.
    The United States has a deep and abiding interest in cross-Strait 
peace and stability. It is important that both sides of the Taiwan 
Strait understand the importance of these benefits and work to 
establish a basis for continued peace and stability. The benefits that 
stable cross-Strait ties have brought to both sides of the Taiwan 
Strait, the United States, and the region have been enormous.
    If confirmed, I would continue to support our robust relations with 
Taiwan and encourage authorities in Beijing and Taipei to engage in 
constructive dialogue that seeks a peaceful resolution of differences 
acceptable to the people of both sides of the Taiwan Strait.

    Question 43. Would port visits of U.S. Naval ships to Taiwan be 
consistent with the one China Policy?

    Answer. The United States should remain fully committed to carrying 
out the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). Consistent with the TRA and our one 
China policy, unofficial relations between the United States and Taiwan 
should continue to feature a robust security cooperation program that 
includes maintenance, training, and exchanges. Over the last few years, 
the United States has nearly doubled the number of annual security 
cooperation events, further enabling Taiwan to strengthen its self-
defense capability. If confirmed, I will remain fully committed to 
carrying out the TRA.

    Question 44. Do you support returning to an annualized arms sale 
process with Taiwan, such as what occurred before 2001?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to support arms sales to 
Taiwan. In June 2017, the administration notified Congress of a $1.42 
billion defense arms sale package. Consistent with the Taiwan Relations 
Act (TRA), the United States has regularly made available to Taiwan 
defense articles and services necessary to enable Taiwan to maintain a 
sufficient self-defense capability and maintain the capacity of the 
United States to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion 
that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, 
of the people on Taiwan. This supports improved relations across the 
Taiwan Strait by providing Taipei with the confidence to pursue 
constructive interactions with Beijing.
    The long-standing policy on defense sales to Taiwan has contributed 
to the security of Taiwan and also supported the maintenance of peace 
and stability across the Taiwan Strait. Arms sales are a visible 
demonstration of U.S. support for Taiwan. U.S. security assistance to 
Taiwan is greater than just the provision of arms. The United States 
also supports Taiwan with training, doctrine development, and expertise 
on asymmetric approaches to warfare, helping Taiwan to strengthen its 
self-defense capability.

    Question 45. Why do you believe U.S. arms sales to Taiwan have been 
so inconsistent?

    Answer. U.S. long-standing policy on defense sales to Taiwan has 
been consistent across seven different U.S. administrations. U.S. sales 
of defense articles and services are guided by the Taiwan Relations Act 
and based on an assessment of Taiwan's defense needs, and in accordance 
with procedures established by law. This consistent policy has 
contributed to the security of Taiwan and also supported the 
maintenance of peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.

    Question 46. During your time in the Bureau of East Asian and 
Pacific Affairs, have you personally played in role in delaying any 
pending U.S. arms sales to Taiwan?

    Answer. No. During my time in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific 
Affairs, I have consistently worked to expeditiously process all 
requests, for arms sales to Taiwan, including the June 2017 sale, in 
accordance by the Taiwan Relations Act. If confirmed, I will continue 
to do so.

    Question 47. It has long been the policy of the U.S. Government, 
provided by the Tibetan Policy Act, to promote dialogue between the 
envoys of the Dalai Lama and the Chinese Government toward a solution 
on the Tibet issue that guarantees the respect of the ``distinct 
identity'' of the Tibetan people. The dialogue is now at a standstill 
and the lack of substantive progress toward a genuine resolution 
continues to be a thorny issue in U.S.-China relations. The United 
States has played a key role in encouraging past dialogues. Would you, 
if confirmed, personally commit to pressing Chinese leadership for a 
resolution of the Tibetan issue through a speedy resumption of dialogue 
with the Tibetan side, without preconditions?

    Answer. I am deeply concerned by the lack of meaningful autonomy 
for the people of Tibet. If confirmed, I will urge Chinese authorities 
to engage in a meaningful and direct dialogue with the Dalai Lama or 
his representatives, without preconditions, to lower tensions and 
resolve differences. I also will continue to urge China to cease 
restrictions on the religious, linguistic, and cultural traditions and 
practices of the Tibetan people.

    Question 48. Will you, if confirmed, commit to pressing the Chinese 
authorities to allow for the opening of a U.S. consulate in Lhasa?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to press the Chinese 
Government to allow the opening of a U.S. Consulate in Lhasa.

    Question 49. Will you, if confirmed, commit to explaining to the 
Chinese that the U.S. will recognize and interact with the person 
chosen independently, to succeed the current Dalai Lama through Tibetan 
Buddhism's spiritual tradition, and consistent with the processes 
described by the current Dalai Lama?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will reaffirm to Chinese authorities that 
the United States will continue to respect the religious practices and 
traditions of Tibetans and to meet with those persons we deem it in our 
interest to meet. This includes those reincarnate lamas who lead the 
faith, such as the Dalai Lama.

    Question 50. Will you, if confirmed, also make it clear that the 
United States will not accept a Chinese Government-controlled process 
to select the Dalai Lama's successor?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will speak out against Chinese Government 
interference in Tibetan religious practices, particularly the 
selection, education, and veneration of the reincarnate lamas who lead 
the faith, such as the Dalai Lama. I will continue to raise directly 
with the Chinese Government our concerns about restrictions placed on 
the religious freedom of Tibetans.

    Question 51. What points of leverage do you think the United States 
has to obtain freedom outside China for Liu Xia, the widow of 2010 
Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo? If confirmed, what points would 
you be willing to use?

    Answer. I remain deeply concerned about Liu Xia's well-being have 
frequently pressed Chinese officials on her right to travel freely, and 
have worked with like-minded partners to press her case. If confirmed, 
I will continue to review and make use of all tools at my disposal to 
press for Liu Xia's well-being and freedom of communication and 
movement including travel abroad.

    Question 52. If confirmed, would you commit to trying to go see Liu 
Xia?

    Answer. I remain deeply concerned about Liu Xia's well-being. If 
confirmed, I am committed to exploring all avenues, including whatever 
requests for access and visits will make Liu Xia's situation better.

    Question 53. Senior administration officials, including Secretary 
of State Rex Tillerson, have said that human rights are ``embedded'' in 
U.S. foreign policy. Can you please explain in concrete terms what you 
believe that means with respect to human rights in China, and also 
provide two or three examples of your having acted on it?

    Answer. Promoting respect for human rights and fundamental 
freedoms, including freedom of religion or belief, remains a key 
component of American foreign policy. Our values regarding human 
rights, fundamental freedoms, and human dignity should guide our 
foreign policy and how we work with other countries. U.S. advancement 
of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law have contributed to the 
success story of the Indo-Pacific region over the last half century 
and, if confirmed, I will work to advance these fundamental U.S. values 
in the region.
    During my time as Acting Assistant Secretary, I regularly condemned 
human rights violations and abuses in China, and raised and advocated 
for individual cases of concerns with Chinese counterparts. At 
consecutive sessions of the United Nations Human Rights Council since 
February 2017, I ensured the United States raised our concerns publicly 
about reports of China's arbitrary detention and torture of lawyers and 
activists, constraints on civil society and religious practices, 
discrimination against/ human rights abuses with respect to the denial 
of rights to Tibetans and Uighurs, the crackdown on peaceful political 
expression, and reprisals against human rights activists. In March 
2017, I reviewed and approved the Department of State's annual Human 
Rights Report detailing the continued widespread abuses of human rights 
and fundamental freedoms in China. Later that month, Secretary 
Tillerson made his first visit to China, during which he and I made 
clear that the United States would continue to advocate for human 
rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of religion and 
belief, universal values such as human rights and religious freedom. 
The following month, on the sidelines of the U.S.-China summit at Mar-
a-Lago I raised specific human rights cases of concerns with Chinese 
counterparts. In April 2017, we secured the release of an American 
businesswoman from Houston who had been in prolonged pretrial detention 
in China for over two years, one of several American citizens I have 
personally helped to overcome exit bans.
    Over the past year, I have also supported Department of State 
officials' attendance at the Chinese trials and sentencings of numerous 
human rights lawyers and activists who have reportedly faced serious 
mistreatment and torture while in detention, and private meetings 
privately with the wives and family members of those who have been 
detained. Publicly, I have drafted and approved the Department of State 
statements marking the passing of Chinese Nobel Peace Prize Laureate 
Liu Xiaobo, the two-year anniversary of the launch of the Chinese 
Government's nationwide campaign of intimidation against defense 
lawyers and rights defenders, and the detention of Swedish citizen and 
Hong Kong bookseller Gui Minhai. I also approved the publication by our 
Embassy of a statement on International Human Rights Day, and a joint 
statement with the Germany Embassy on the sentencing of Chinese human 
rights defenders Wu Gan and Xie Yang.
    Among our most intensive efforts this year to advance our human 
rights agenda in China was our effort to secure Liu Xiaobo's freedom. 
In June 2017, the Department of State called on China to allow Liu 
Xiaobo access to international medical specialists and to be allowed to 
seek medical treatment abroad. In July, under my leadership, the Bureau 
of East Asian and Pacific Affairs arranged for a leading American 
cancer specialist to travel to Shenyang to visit and treat Liu, and 
reiterate calls for his ability to seek medical treatment abroad. 
Following Liu's passing, the Secretary released a statement calling for 
the release from house arrest of Liu's widow, Liu Xia, and her ability 
to depart China. If confirmed, I will continue to lead persistent 
public and private efforts to press for Liu Xia's ability to 
communicate freely and travel, including abroad.
    In December, the United States took action to promote 
accountability for serious human rights abuses in China by designating 
a former Chinese prison official under the December 2017 Executive 
Order implementing the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability 
Act. Moreover, we have used our high-level meetings with the Chinese to 
raise U.S. concerns around issues such as China's foreign NGO 
management law, exit bans placed on U.S. citizens, and specific 
detentions of Chinese activists. I, and my colleagues in the Bureau of 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs, have met regularly with Chinese human 
rights lawyers and activists such as Chen Guangcheng, leaders of non-
government and non-profit organizations promoting greater respect for 
human rights in China such as Dui Hua Foundation founder John Kamm, and 
members of ethnic and religious minority groups such as World Uighur 
Congress president Dolkun Isa and Tibetan filmmaker Dhondup Wangchen. 
If confirmed, I will continue to raise our concerns about China's human 
rights issues, both in our private conversations and publicly, and 
encourage greater respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, and 
the rule of law in China.

    Question 54. During your time at the State Department's Bureau of 
East Asian and Pacific Affairs, how many Chinese human rights advocates 
or Chinese dissidents have you met with? Please provide us with notable 
examples in recent years.

    Answer. I am troubled by the well-documented deterioration of the 
human rights situation in China. During my time in the EAP Bureau, I 
have met with countless human rights advocates and Chinese dissidents, 
including the Dalai Lama, Rebiya Kadeer, Liu Xiaobo (prior to his 
detention), and many others. If confirmed, I will continue to meet with 
such individuals and raise specific human rights cases of concern with 
Chinese authorities, as appropriate.

    Question 55. Will you commit to trying to visit all of the people 
wrongfully detained in China who are relatives of U.S. citizens?

    Answer. The safety and security of U.S. citizens is one of the 
Department's top priorities. Consular officers help U.S. citizens at 
all hours of the day, in all types of situations, be it criminal 
matter, a health crisis, or simply needing passports or birth 
certificates.
    I have regularly raised cases of detained American Citizens with my 
Chinese counterparts, and U.S. consular officials regularly visit U.S. 
detainees as permitted under our bilateral agreements with China.
    For others persons wrongfully detained in China, the State 
Department remains committed to helping shine a light on their cases. 
If confirmed, I will continue to raise and advocate for individual 
human rights cases of concern with Chinese authorities and encourage 
greater respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, and the rule of 
law in China. If the families desire it, I am always happy to meet with 
them.

    Question 56. Are you aware of cases where the Chinese Government 
has detained a U.S. citizen or otherwise prevented a U.S. citizen from 
exiting as leverage to coerce a Chinese citizen into returning to 
China? If yes, what policies will you advocate, if confirmed, to 
counter and reverse this practice by the Chinese Government?

    Answer. Yes, I and other senior U.S. Government officials have 
regularly raised exit bans with the Chinese, particularly when these 
seem to involve parties not under investigation. The Department 
recently had success on lifting an exit ban on a young woman after 
significant, high-level intervention.
    The State Department should continue to push China to lift exit 
bans for all U.S. citizens, and to have a more transparent process on 
how they are applied and can be lifted. If confirmed, I as Assistant 
Secretary will continue to raise these cases at the highest level 
necessary to ensure the release of U.S. citizens detained or the 
ability of U.S. citizens to depart China.

    Question 57. Chinese President Xi Jinping has cracked down harshly 
on dissent, targeting ethnic and religious minorities, human rights 
lawyers, journalists, civil society activists, and even average 
internet users for arrest and imprisonment. The Chinese Government has 
also ramped up its hostility toward foreigners and foreign entities 
through restrictive new legislation and official propaganda. How will 
you persuade Chinese officials to end practices and policies that harm 
both the people of China and U.S. interests, including those of 
American businesses?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will continue to review and make use of all 
tools at my disposal to promote greater respect for human rights, 
fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law in China, including in 
coordination with likeminded countries and partners. I am committed to 
continuing to raise our concerns over respect for human rights, 
including freedom of religion and belief, in all my conversations with 
Chinese officials, and to advocate for specific cases of concern.
    The State Department regularly presses China in support of U.S. 
business interests. As part of the overall effort to ensure a fair and 
reciprocal economic relationship between the United States and China, 
the State Department protests instances in which American companies 
operating in China are subject to opaque rules, arbitrary imposition of 
regulations, and political interference in their business operations. 
If confirmed, I will continue to advocate for U.S. companies operating 
in China and strongly urge Chinese authorities to work constructively 
with company representatives to resolve business disputes in the spirit 
of openness, transparency, and without resort to coercion or threat.

    Question 58. How can State improve its coordination with American 
business and academic institutions to advance practices and policies 
that enhance freedom in China?

    Answer. The United States has repeatedly raised concerns about 
freedom of expression, including as it relates to academic and media 
freedom, including at the U.S.-China Social & Cultural Dialogue and 
other engagements with Chinese leadership. The State Department should 
continue to call on Chinese authorities to unblock websites of U.S. 
business and media, eliminate restrictions that impede the ability of 
journalists to practice their profession, and allow all individuals to 
express their views without fear of retribution. The State Department 
should continue supporting the efforts of American chambers of commerce 
and business associations in their efforts to highlight their business 
practices, including transparency, respect for the individual and 
diversity, and corporate social responsibility.
    The State Department's Bureaus of Educational and Cultural Affairs 
and East Asian and Pacific affairs are engaged in detailed discussions 
with higher education associations to discuss best practices for 
academic engagement with China. The goal is to help universities 
encourage Chinese students to experience the full range of American 
values during their time in the United States, including freedom of 
expression. U.S. Mission China also supports exchange programs that 
engage important segments of Chinese society, and fosters relationships 
with influential emerging leaders and other stakeholders in both 
countries.

    Question 59. Do you agree with President Trump and his National 
Security Strategy document that the People's Republic of China is a 
strategic competitor of the United States?

    Answer. Yes, I believe that the National Security Strategy reflects 
our increasing concerns about Chinese actions that are undermining the 
international rules-based order.
    The United States should not shy away from speaking forthrightly 
about, and contesting, Chinese policies and actions that undermine the 
international order that has fostered peace and prosperity for the 
Indo-Pacific region for decades.
    We should also remain committed to seeking a constructive and 
results-oriented relationship with China. We should continue to 
cooperate with China where we can to broaden and address issues of 
common interests, including the threat posed by North Korea and the 
flow of illegal opioids from China, while addressing our differences 
constructively.

    Question 60. Was President Obama and his administration correct or 
incorrect not to describe China as a strategic competitor? Why so?

    Answer. China is now the world's second largest economy with 
increasingly far flung business interests, one of the most capable and 
growing militaries in the Asia-Pacific, and an active player on the 
global stage. Our policies should continue to evolve and adapt to 
present-day China and to other changes to the international 
environment.

    Question 61. If confirmed, will you make ``the long-term strategic 
competition with China'' also a principal priority for the State 
Department's Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs? What changes or 
sustained efforts do you plan to make to the Bureau of East Asian and 
Pacific Affairs to better prepare it for dealing with China as a 
strategic competitor to the United States?

    Answer. The rise of China poses a major challenge to U.S. interests 
in East Asia and the Pacific. If confirmed, I will ensure the Bureau of 
East Asia and Pacific Affairs' approach to dealing with the challenges 
is consistent with the National Security Strategy. We should not shy 
away from speaking forthrightly about and contesting Chinese policies 
and actions that undermine the international order that has fostered 
peace and prosperity for the Indo-Pacific region for decades. It should 
be in every country's interest to uphold this order, and if confirmed, 
I will make working with our Indo-Pacific allies and partners to defend 
and strengthen the rules-based system a priority. I will also work with 
colleagues across the Department of State and throughout the 
interagency to ensure that we apply the same, consistent approach 
outside the region to pushing back against Chinese behavior when it 
threatens to undercut the global rules-based order.

    Question 62. If confirmed, what role would you make defending 
fundamental human rights and universal values in China play in efforts 
by the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs to make ``the long-term 
strategic competition with China a priority''?

    Answer. The State Department should not shy away from speaking 
forthrightly about and contesting Chinese policies and actions that 
undermine the international order that has fostered peace and 
prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region for decades. We should continue 
to work with China on important issues, from North Korea to countering 
the flow of illegal opioids. At the same time, we should draw a clear 
distinction where we disagree. We must remain committed to defending 
our values and championing human rights and fundamental freedoms around 
the world.
    In pursuit of our vision of a free and open Indo-Pacific region, 
the United States should continue to work cooperatively with allies and 
like-minded partners to uphold the rules-based order, and to advance 
fundamental U.S. values around democracy, human rights, and the rule of 
law in the region. Our strategy should be to continue to promote 
democratic values and work closely with other democracies to strengthen 
respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including freedom of 
expression and freedom of religion and belief. If confirmed, I am 
committed to continuing to make use of all tools at our disposal to 
press for progress on human rights in China as a key component of U.S. 
foreign policy in the region.

    Question 63. During a State Department press briefing prior to the 
inaugural U.S.-China Diplomatic and Security Dialogue, you were asked a 
question about the administration's approach to the South China Sea. 
During your response, you noted, ``We think it's important that 
tensions are lowered over these issues.'' Do you view lowering tensions 
with China as policy goal in and of itself?

    Answer. No. U.S. policy advocates that maritime disputes in the 
South China Sea should be resolved peacefully. Maintaining peace, 
security, and the freedoms of navigation and overflight and other 
lawful uses of the sea have been and should continue to be a priority 
for the United States. During the past year, the State Department has 
approved numerous operations, including freedom of navigation 
operations, to defend these principles. I continue to have serious 
concerns over ongoing developments in the South China Sea, and we 
should continue to condemn coercion and call on all parties, including 
China, to set the conditions for constructive diplomatic engagement.

    Question 64. Do you place a higher priority on lowering tensions 
with regard to the Chinese Government's provocative actions to change 
the status quo in the South China Sea or on preventing the South China 
Sea's domination by the Chinese Government?

    Answer. The United States should prioritize maintaining peace, 
security, stability, and the freedoms of navigation and overflight and 
other lawful uses of the sea. I have serious concerns over ongoing 
developments in the South China Sea.
    I fully support the administration's policy to oppose intimidation, 
coercion, and the threat or use of force by any claimant to assert 
South China Sea claims, and note that China's activities, in 
particular, continue to overshadow those of other claimants in scope 
and provocativeness.
    If confirmed, I will continue to support operations to defend 
freedom of navigation and overflight, and to engage bilaterally with 
countries across the region and through multilateral fora to reinforce 
support for the rules-based international system that has been 
indispensable for the peace, security, and prosperity of the Indo-
Pacific region, including in the South China Sea.

    Question 65. Do you believe that the Obama administration gave too 
much priority to concluding the Paris Accord and, as a result, was too 
soft on China's expansionist behavior in 2015?

    Answer. Concluding the Paris Accord was a stated priority of the 
Obama administration. If confirmed, I believe the United States should 
not shy away from speaking forthrightly about and contesting Chinese 
policies and actions that undermine the rules-based system that has 
fostered peace and prosperity for the Indo-Pacific region for decades. 
It is important for the United States to have a strong posture in the 
Indo-Pacific, which will enable the United States to better safeguard 
our interests in the region, including ensuring that our allies and 
partners are secure from military threats or coercion. The United 
States should continue to encourage cooperation to maintain free and 
open seaways, promote good governance and transparent infrastructure 
financing practices, and advance unimpeded commerce under free market 
principles.
    If confirmed, I will work with our allies and partners to advance 
the region's security and prosperity, develop its institutions, and 
prevent the erosion of the rules-based international order.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
            Susan A. Thornton by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. The promotion of human rights and democracy has been a 
longstanding priority for me throughout my career. As Principal Deputy 
Assistant Secretary responsible for Chinese and Mongolian Affairs and 
then acting Assistant Secretary of the East Asian and Pacific Affairs 
Bureau, I have worked to ensure that human rights issues are 
consistently raised in our engagements with countries across the region 
at all levels. In our bilateral and multilateral engagements, I have 
worked to ensure that the advancement of human rights and the promotion 
of democratic values are enshrined in high-level statements.
    During my time as Acting Assistant Secretary, I regularly condemned 
human rights violations and abuses in China, and raised and advocated 
for individual cases of concerns with Chinese counterparts. For 
example, in April 2017 we secured the release of an American 
businesswoman from Houston who had been in prolonged pretrial detention 
in China for over 2 years. In December we took action to promote 
accountability for serious human rights abuses in China by designating 
a former Chinese prison official under the December 2017 Executive 
Order implementing the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability 
Act. Moreover, we have used our high-level meetings with the Chinese to 
raise U.S. concerns around issues such as China's foreign NGO 
management law, exit bans placed on U.S. citizens, and specific 
detentions of Chinese activists.
    I also accompanied Secretary Tillerson to Burma last November to 
press the Government of Burma to address the ongoing crisis in northern 
Rakhine State and have supported efforts to hold those responsible for 
ethnic cleansing to account. I supported the application of Global 
Magnitsky sanctions to hold accountable individuals involved in 
significant corruption or gross violation of human rights in Burma as 
well.
    If confirmed, I will continue to ensure that the promotion of human 
rights and democratic values remain a high priority in our diplomatic 
engagement in the Asia-Pacific region.

    Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the 
East Asian and Pacific region today? What are the most important steps 
you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy 
in East Asia and the Pacific? What do you hope to accomplish through 
these actions?

    Answer. I am concerned by an increase in government efforts across 
the Asia-Pacific region to shrink the space for civil society, 
including through the passage of overly restrictive NGO registration 
and management laws in places like China and Cambodia, and restrictions 
on fundamental freedoms, including expression and assembly. Burma's 
democratic transition has encountered serious obstacles, and I am very 
concerned by the ethnic cleansing in northern Rakhine State and the 
continued arrest and detention of political prisoners.
    In China, I remain troubled by reports that lawyers and activists, 
including foreign nationals, are being arbitrarily detained, tortured, 
and forced to confess to political charges on state media, and that in 
many cases, authorities have retaliated against their families. 
Additionally, I am concerned about conditions akin to martial law that 
have been imposed in Xinjiang and some Tibetan areas. China's 
restrictions on religious expression and indigenous language education 
in Tibet and Xinjiang limit U.S.-China cooperation on counterterrorism 
issues. These repressive practices not only violate human rights but 
also exacerbate social unrest and ethnic tension, and can actually 
foment violence. If confirmed, I will continue to focus attention on 
China's human right abuses, both in our private conversations and 
publicly, and encourage greater respect for human rights, fundamental 
freedoms, and the rule of law in China.
    The human rights situation in the DPRK remains one of the worst in 
the world. I recently had the honor of meeting with a group of North 
Korean refugees and heard their concerns about the deplorable human 
rights abuses committed by the North Korean regime. They described 
horrific conditions inside the country and the terrifying journey 
through China to freedom. If confirmed, I will continue to prioritize 
North Korean human rights. I will seek additional ways to amplify 
refugee voices, promote accountability for those responsible for human 
rights violations and abuses, and increase the flow of independent, 
uncensored information into, out of, and within the DPRK. In addition, 
I will continue to press for China to stop its practice of detaining 
and refouling North Korean asylum seekers.
    In engagement across the region, including at the highest levels, 
we should continue to constantly message the importance of an active 
civil society, protection of human rights, and respect for the rule of 
law. We should also continue working with likeminded governments and 
NGO partners to sustain and expand programs to support embattled civil 
society organizations and provide them with the resources they need to 
continue their vital work. We should keep vetting all security force 
units prior to their receipt of U.S. funded assistance in accordance 
with the Leahy Law, and not provide assistance to any security force 
unit where we have credible information of commission of a gross 
violation of human rights. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that we 
continue to apply the Leahy Law, and will continue to examine closely 
cases that may merit the application of sanctions under the Executive 
Order 13818, which implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights 
Accountability Act.
    If confirmed, I will continue to uphold and work to advance the 
fundamental U.S. values of democracy and human rights in the region.

    Question 3. 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 advancing human 
rights, civil society and democracy in general?

    Answer. Backsliding on democracy, governance, corruption and human 
rights is undermining prospects for stability and growth in some 
countries. The shifting tactics of authoritarian regimes to constrain 
civil society represent difficult obstacles and challenges to advancing 
human rights, civil society, and democracy in general in the region.

    Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in the East Asia and Pacific region?

    Answer. Yes. I have met frequently with representatives from human 
rights, civil society, and other non-governmental organizations 
throughout my career. If confirmed, I will continue to be committed to 
meeting with these organizations in the United States and in the East 
Asia and Pacific region.

    Question 5. Will you and your team actively engage with countries 
in the East Asia and Pacific region to address cases of key political 
prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, my team and I will actively engage with 
countries in the East Asia and Pacific region to address cases of key 
political prisoners or persons otherwise unjustly targeted.

    Question 6. If confirmed, what steps will you take to pro-actively 
support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and ensure that provisions 
of U.S. security assistance and security cooperation activities 
reinforce human rights?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that we continue to 
faithfully uphold and apply the Leahy Law and ensure we do not provide 
assistance to any security force unit where we have credible 
information of commission of a gross violation of human rights. If 
confirmed, I will ensure that our staff at our posts and in the EAP 
Bureau dedicated to Leahy vetting continue to receive accurate, current 
guidance on the Leahy Law and continue to vet all security force units 
prior to their receipt of U.S. funded assistance.

    Question 7. Will you engage with the people of the East Asia and 
Pacific region on matters of human rights,civil rights and governance 
as part of your mission?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will continue to engage with the 
people of the East Asia and Pacific region on matters of human rights, 
civil rights and governance as part of my mission.

    Question 8. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in 
the Civil and Foreign Service?

    Answer. I believe strongly in the value of diversity. I will 
continue to be committed to fostering a diverse and inclusive team, as 
I have throughout my career, including as Principal Deputy Assistant 
Secretary in the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs where I have 
stressed the importance of inclusion, leadership, and professional 
development in our recruitment of personnel. If confirmed, I will 
ensure that the EAP Bureau continues to promote equal opportunities for 
all of our personnel, particularly those from diverse backgrounds or 
historically underrepresented groups. I will also ensure EAP managers 
prioritize mentoring and ensure that we are developing a new generation 
of diplomats to represent our country effectively. I will encourage my 
Deputy Assistant Secretaries, Office Directors, and Deputy Directors to 
play an active role in outreach to the Department's 13 Employee 
Affinity Groups and 19 Employee Organizations so we can recruit and 
retain a workforce that reflects the diversity of American society. By 
collaborating closely with these and other groups, we can foster an 
environment that is diverse and inclusive. I will foster a work 
environment which recognizes the contributions of all employees, and 
will make sure they have information available about the Department's 
Diversity and Inclusion Strategic Plan. In the past year as Acting 
Assistant Secretary, diversity has been a core value in our recruitment 
at all levels, and especially for leadership positions as I believe we 
need to model diversity at the highest levels of government.

    Question 9. What steps will you take to ensure your supervisors are 
fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

    Answer. I will continue to emphasize the importance of diversity, 
leadership, and professional development for all of our employees and 
reward supervisors who proactively bring in new and diverse voices and 
ideas to their teams and their work products. I am very supportive of 
Department of State programs to promote diversity, including through 
mechanisms such as the Pickering and Rangel Fellowships. I am proud 
that EAP is slated to host over two dozen Pickering and Rangel Fellows 
in domestic and overseas positions this summer where we can share 
unique opportunities in the EAP region. I hope their positive early 
career experiences serving in the EAP region will encourage their 
subsequent return to more senior Civil or Foreign Service assignments 
in our region.
    I encourage supervisors to value the contributions of all members 
of their team: Civil Service, Foreign Service, Locally Engaged Staff, 
expanded professional associates (EPAP), and employed family members 
(EFMs), Fellows, and interns, etc. I have emphasized to supervisors the 
importance of giving constructive feedback, not just in the annual 
performance evaluations but throughout the year. As the Bureau 
leverages opportunities for training, public-speaking, travel, and 
formal or informal leadership, selecting EAP candidates that represent 
the geographic and cultural diversity of American society will be an 
important factor. We are working to increase the mobility and 
opportunities for advancement for our Civil Service team members by 
identifying developmental roles and establishing career ladders for 
many of our positions. This will empower and motivate Civil Service 
colleagues to remain connected with our missions overseas and enable us 
to retain expertise in the Department.
    In addition to creating opportunities for employees to continue 
their professional development, I support formal and informal 
networking across the bureau to encourage mentoring and exchange of 
diverse views at all levels. I have encouraged hiring managers to 
consider the profile of their current teams and find ways to recruit to 
add new skill sets and diversity of views and experiences to their mix. 
The recruitment of personnel from diverse backgrounds and 
underrepresented groups into the Civil and Foreign Service is something 
I have strongly supported, and if confirmed, I will continue to 
prioritize this in the professional development of EAP's managers and 
leaders.

    Question 10. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to fully comply with all relevant federal ethics 
laws, regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns, if any arise, 
through appropriate channels.

    Question 11. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns, should they arise, 
through appropriate channels.

    Question 12. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in the East Asia and Pacific region?

    Answer. My investment portfolio includes diversified funds that may 
have investments in companies in the East Asia and Pacific region; 
however, the funds are exempt from the conflicts of interest rules and 
have been reviewed by the State Department Ethics Office. I am 
committed to ensuring that my official actions will not give rise to 
conflicts of interest. I will divest my interests in any investments 
the State Department Ethics Office deems necessary in the future to 
avoid a conflict of interest, and will remain vigilant with regard to 
my ethics obligations.

    Question 13. Does the State Department agree with the determination 
of the U.N., Human Rights Watch, and several senators in this Congress, 
that the atrocities committed in the last year amount to crimes against 
humanity? If not, why not?

    Answer. The Secretary of State reviewed the facts available to him 
as part of a careful and deliberative process, and concluded that 
abuses in Burma's northern Rakhine State, by some among the Burmese 
military, security forces, and local vigilantes, constituted ethnic 
cleansing against Rohingya. This determination in no way prejudices any 
further analysis on whether other mass atrocities have taken place, 
including crimes against humanity.

    Question 14. Do you, speaking for yourself, believe the atrocities 
amount to crimes against humanity? If you cannot answer, will you 
pledge now to conduct an immediate review, with consultation with civil 
society, and with this committee, and reach a determination about the 
legal status of the atrocities committed in Rakhine?

    Answer. I share your grave concern regarding the atrocities 
committed by Burmese security forces and vigilantes against Rohingya, 
and believe that those responsible for human rights abuses and 
violations should be held accountable. Historically, the Secretary of 
State has decided whether to characterize particular atrocities as 
genocide, crimes against humanity, or ethnic cleansing after reviewing 
factual assessments and legal assessments.

    Question 15. If the U.S. Government determined that crimes against 
humanity had been committed, what would be the response?

    Answer. If the Secretary of State determines that crimes against 
humanity occurred, if confirmed, I would have the EAP bureau work with 
others in the Department, Congress, and the interagency, as well as 
relevant international bodies and partners, to shape an appropriate 
response, consistent with applicable law.

    Question 16. Would you agree that the U.S. Government should seek 
debate in the U.N. Security Council on whether to refer the situation 
in Burma to the International Criminal Court? If not, why not?

    Answer. Whether to seek debate in the U.N. Security Council on a 
particular issue, as well as whether to support particular action by 
the U.N. Security Council, is a decision that would be made in 
consultation with other bureaus in the Department, relevant agencies, 
and the National Security Council.

    Question 17. Has the State Department determined whether the 
atrocities in Rakhine amounted to genocide? Has the State Department 
determined that the atrocities in Rakhine did not amount to genocide?

    Answer. The Secretary of State reviewed the facts available to him 
as part of a careful and deliberative process, and concluded that 
abuses in Burma's northern Rakhine State, by some among the Burmese 
military, security forces, and local vigilantes, constitute ethnic 
cleansing against Rohingya. This determination in no way prejudices any 
further analysis on whether other mass atrocities have taken place, 
including genocide.

    Question 18. Do you agree that the U.S. Government would be 
obligated to determine that the crime of genocide was committed, if 
credible information is obtained that shows a ``genocidal intent'' on 
the part of perpetrators? Do you agree that genocidal intent is shown 
when credible information is obtained that perpetrators committed the 
atrocities in Rakhine with the intent to destroy the Rohingya 
population in Burma in whole or in part, whether by outright violence, 
destruction of property, or full-scale deprivation of basic rights? If 
credible information showing such intent was obtained, do you not agree 
that the U.S. Government would be obligated to determine that genocide 
had been committed?

    Answer. ``Genocide'' is defined in the 1948 Convention on the 
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the ``Genocide 
Convention''), which the United States ratified in 1988. Historically, 
the Secretary of State has decided whether to characterize particular 
atrocities as genocide after reviewing factual and legal assessments.

    Question 19. If the U.S. Government determined that genocide had 
been committed, what would be the response?

    Answer. If the Secretary of State determines that genocide 
occurred, if confirmed, I would have the EAP bureau work with others in 
the Department and the interagency, as well as relevant international 
bodies and partners, to shape an appropriate response, consistent with 
applicable domestic and international law.

    Question 20. Responses to Burma: The Government of Burma has not 
responded to any of the main pleas by the U.S. Government and 
international actors to address the atrocities in Burma.
    They have refused to cooperation with a U.N. mandated fact finding 
mission, have now declared the special rapporteur persona non grata, 
and largely refuse to provide access to Rakhine by U.N. and 
humanitarian actors, human rights groups, and journalists. All of this 
stubbornness and obstruction occurs as Burma's nascent democratic 
transition shows signs of weakening. The military has completely 
blocked efforts to end its constitutionally protected role in the 
Government, and it is still committing serious abuses during operations 
in other ethnic minority areas, blocking access to humanitarian 
agencies, and causing mass displacement.
    Given the context of the terrible abuses in Rakhine, and breakdown 
in the democratic transition, it is now clear that ordinary diplomatic 
approaches of engagement and dialogue are no longer meaningfully 
effective, and clearing the administration agrees, because it has now 
begun, at the U.N. Security Council in New York and the U.N. Human 
Rights Council in Geneva, to press for stronger measures against Burma, 
and has bilaterally imposed travel restrictions on military commanders, 
and recently added a senior Burmese military official, Gen. Maung Maung 
Soe, to the Treasury Department Specially Designated Nationals (SDN) 
list.
    Do you agree with this approach? Do you agree that the time has 
come for stronger measures, aimed at imposing real world costs on 
Burmese military commanders implicated in abuses and who are imperiling 
the democratic transition?

    Answer. I share your grave concern regarding the atrocities 
committed by Burmese security forces and vigilantes against Rohingya. 
We should target sanctions of Burmese military officials responsible 
for human rights abuses and violations, both to promote accountability 
and to apply further pressure on the military to cooperate with the 
international community. At the same time, while the elected civilian 
government has short comings, it is more open to continued progress on 
human rights and democratic reform than the military. Given the complex 
role the military has in the country, and the ongoing struggle between 
the military and the elected civilian government, we should carefully 
calibrate our actions such that they do not have unintended spillover 
effects that could strengthen the military vis-a-vis the civilian 
government, for example by damaging the larger economy or engendering 
greater public support for the military.

    Question 21. Do you agree that, if handled correctly, increased 
sanctions on senior military commanders could help pressure them to 
begin cooperating with the international community?

    Answer. Targeted sanctions on Burmese military officials represent 
one of the key policy tools to apply pressure on the military to 
cooperate with the international community, and we should consider 
additional targeted sanctions as appropriate.

    Question 22. Will you pledge to accelerate efforts to add more 
names of senior military commanders to the SDN list?

    Answer. We should consider options to promote accountability for 
Burmese military officials involved in atrocities, including with 
additional targeted sanctions. All sanctioned persons are added to 
Treasury's Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN) 
list.

    Question 23. Do you support the passage of S. 2060, Burma Human 
Rights and Freedom Act, in this Congress? If not, why not?

    Answer. I believe we should continue to help the democratically-
elected government improve governance, human rights, and economic 
reforms. The civilian leadership, for example, has undertaken nascent 
reform efforts, and it's important we are careful not to inadvertently 
undermine those efforts. I believe targeted actions, rather than broad 
sanctions, can be the most effective means for holding Burma's military 
to account for abuses.

    Question 24. What other increased costs can the U.S. Government 
impose on the senior Burma military command, to change their thinking 
and behavior?

    Answer. In response to the Burmese military's role in the crisis in 
Rakhine State, the United States has ceased consideration of JADE Act 
travel waivers for current and former senior leaders of the Burmese 
military, and has withdrawn invitations for Burmese officials to 
participate in events with the U.S. military. We should continue 
options to promote accountability, including targeted sanctions. In 
addition, pursuant to the Leahy Law, the United States has assessed 
that there is credible information implicating all military units and 
officers involved in operations in northern Rakhine State in the 
commission of gross violations of human rights, as such making them 
ineligible to receive U.S. assistance.

    Question 25. Do you pledge to work with your colleagues at the 
State Department to urge other states and regional entities, including 
the European Union, to impose sanctions and travel restrictions?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will encourage likeminded countries and 
entities to use available legal measures to promote accountability for 
members of the Burmese security forces responsible for human rights 
violations and abuses. To this end, we should provide likeminded 
countries with information, as appropriate.

    Question 26. Will you pledge to oppose Burmese military involvement 
or participation in all regional and military exercises, until and 
unless they begin to take steps to address their human rights abuses?

    Answer. In response to the Burmese military's role in the crisis in 
Rakhine State, I agree with opposing Burmese flag officer-level 
participation in regional military exercises in which the United States 
is a co-host. We should continue to do so until we assess that the 
Burmese military has taken appropriate steps to address human rights 
abuses.
TPP
    Question 27. Last week, the eleven countries that continued to 
negotiate the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement, including Canada and 
Mexico, announced that they will sign a new version of the TPP in 
March.

   In your view[s], how would a renegotiated TPP affect the trading 
        and economic relationship among the U.S., Japan, Australia, and 
        ASEAN nations involved?
   I had some concerns about TPP. But I'm also concerned that 
        unilaterally removing the U.S. from those discussions may not 
        only have undermined our ability to engage constructively in 
        the Asia-Pacific region, but may also have an indirect effect 
        on economic opportunities with our closest neighbors.

    Answer. The President has consistently expressed an interest in 
pursuing trade agreements that serve the interests of U.S. businesses, 
workers, and long-term U.S. economic security. This includes 
strengthening our economic relationships across the Indo-Pacific 
region, including with the TPP-11 countries, in any way that achieves 
these goals. As the President has made clear, we should only consider 
TPP if we are able to make a substantially better deal for the United 
States.
    We should work with our partners to advance high-standard, free, 
fair, and reciprocal trade and investment relationships.
    If confirmed, I will focus on expanding opportunities for U.S. 
firms across the Indo-Pacific and rebalancing our economic 
relationships to ensure fairness. We should also continue to work 
bilaterally and through multilateral fora such as APEC to encourage 
economic growth and open and fair business opportunities.

    Question 28. Human Rights Watch has estimated that the number of 
victims killed by President Duterte's drug war campaign is more than 
12,000. We need to send a much stronger message to the Philippines and 
President Duterte--and also assure that our hands are not covered in 
blood as well if U.S. weapons or other support for the Philippines 
National Police are used in some of these murders. If confirmed, how do 
you plan to send a stronger message that the United States will not 
stand idly by as President Duterte continues to violate international 
law and kill his own people without due process?

    Answer. The United States has expressed its serious concerns 
regarding extrajudicial killings associated with the drug war on 
multiple occasions with Philippine Government officials, and we should 
continue to do so. If confirmed, I will continue to urge the Philippine 
Government to ensure that its law enforcement efforts are consistent 
with its human rights obligations and conducted in accordance with the 
rule of law. I will also encourage the Philippine Government to conduct 
thorough and transparent investigations into all credible reports of 
extrajudicial killings.
    The best way for the Philippines to deal with the issue of 
combating illicit drugs is by adherence to the rule of law and 
strengthening community resources and support systems. Therefore, we 
are working with the Philippines to improve drug prevention, treatment, 
and rehabilitation programs; strengthen respect for human rights; and 
build capacity of the justice sector to handle criminal cases 
effectively, efficiently, and in line with the rule of law. We also vet 
all security force units prior to their receipt of U.S. funding in 
accordance with the Leahy Law which prohibits assistance to any 
security force unit where we have credible information that the unit 
has committed a gross violation of human rights.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                Susan A. Thornton by Senator Todd Young

    Question 1. Ms. Thornton, thank you for meeting with me this week. 
I enjoyed our discussion and look forward to working together in the 
future. Based on my concerns and the counsel of my constituents, I have 
been active in attempting to help address the horrible crisis in Burma 
and Bangladesh impacting the Rohingya. It is important to be clear--
what we have seen in Burma constitutes a clear and deplorable case of 
crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing. I believe it is 
imperative to protect ethnic and religious minorities in Burma and hold 
the Government accountable. Ms. Thornton, if confirmed, do you commit 
to working with me and this committee to craft the best possible U.S. 
policy toward Burma?

    Answer. I share your serious concern regarding the atrocities 
committed in northern Rakhine State, which Secretary Tillerson has 
concluded constituted ethnic cleansing against Rohingya. I am also 
deeply concerned by the humanitarian situation of the over 688,000 
Rohingya refugees who have fled to neighboring Bangladesh as a result 
of the violence, as well as the internal displacement of thousands 
remaining in Rakhine State. In addressing these challenges, I believe 
the Department should engage closely with Congress on Burma and if 
confirmed, I will do so.

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Susan A. Thornton by Senator Edward J. Markey

    Question 1. Within the State Department budget, how would funding 
for Asia-related issues change from the enacted FY2017 budget?

    Answer. The FY 2019 foreign assistance request of $431 million for 
the Asia-Pacific region is 10 percent above the FY 2018 request and 47 
percent below the FY 2017 Actual.
    The FY 2019 Diplomatic Engagement request of $315 million for the 
Asia-Pacific region is 3 percent below the FY 2018 Request and a 14 
percent below the FY 2017 Actual.
    This budget request would support the administration's Indo-Pacific 
strategy that is based on respect for sovereignty, democratic values, 
the rule of law, open markets, fair and reciprocal trading frameworks, 
freedom of navigation, and private sector-led economic growth. The 
request supports programs that help counter violent extremism, 
strengthen maritime capacities, defend against cyberattacks, tackle 
transnational crime, and promote trade and investment that will foster 
economic opportunities for the American people.
    The request also funds the strategic priorities in the Indo-Pacific 
by supporting U.S. treaty allies and emerging strategic partners to 
promote shared national security interests, trade, and investment that 
fosters economic opportunities for the American people.

    Question 2. There is no U.S. Ambassador to South Korea. The 
Coordinator for Sanctions Policy position was eliminated. Please 
describe how the State Department will be staffed to successfully 
execute the administration's North Korea policy--both the 
``engagement'' component, as well as the ``pressure'' component.

    Answer. I believe the Department is fully capable and appropriately 
staffed to conduct both pressure and engagement regarding North Korea. 
The Office of Korean Affairs works closely with multiple other bureaus 
and offices in the State Department, and with interagency partners, to 
effectively implement the U.S. Government's North Korean policy. We 
have a highly capable and well-respected senior diplomat, Charge 
d'Affaires Marc Knapper, leading our tremendous U.S. Embassy team in 
Seoul.

    Question 3. Which countries still provide the greatest revenue 
streams to North Korea? When executing the so-called pressure campaign, 
how would you prioritize which countries would receive the greatest 
pressure?

    Answer. Entities in China and Russia still provide the greatest 
revenue streams to North Korea. Both governments have said they are 
committed to implementing U.N. Security Council resolutions to their 
fullest extent, though there is still illicit trade with North Korea. 
North Korean workers in China and Russia also provide a revenue stream 
to the regime. Stopping illicit transactions from these entities in 
China and Russia continue to be an administration priority to reduce 
the revenue streams that support the DPRK regime's illegal nuclear and 
missile programs.

    Question 4. Can the United States deter a North Korea armed with a 
nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missile, and how would that 
shape policy formulation? If North Korea can be deterred, why should 
the United States consider a preventive military strike, especially 
given the potential consequences? If North Korea cannot be deterred, 
how would a limited strike teach Kim Jong Un not to strike the United 
States or our allies?

    Answer. The administration has stated that its goal is the 
complete, verifiable, and irreversible denuclearization of the Korean 
Peninsula and that the administration seeks to achieve that goal 
through a peaceful, diplomatic solution. This is being done through 
putting maximum pressure on the North Korean regime to change Kim Jong 
Un's calculus, so that he will engage in meaningful dialogue towards 
denuclearization. The United States should continue to lead the 
international community in diplomatically and economically isolating 
the North Korean regime. However, as the President and the Secretary of 
State have also made clear, all options are on the table.

    Question 5. Getting U.S. China policy right is critical for U.S. 
prosperity and security. China is the biggest strategic competitor to 
the United States and seeks to gain advantages where it senses 
weakness. How can the United States better protect a free and open 
liberal international order, intellectual property rights, and a 
democracy free from Chinese Government influence without overly risking 
a trade war, or worse, military conflict?

    Answer. The United States should continue to work cooperatively 
with allies and like-minded partners to uphold the rules-based order, 
and to advance fundamental U.S. values around democracy, human rights, 
and the rule of law in the Indo-Pacific region. We should continue to 
promote democratic values and work closely with other democracies to 
strengthen respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms, including 
freedom of expression and freedom of religion or belief. If confirmed, 
I am committed to continuing to make use of all tools at our disposal 
to press China to live up to its responsibilities as a member of the 
rules-based international order.
    The United States should have a constructive, results-oriented 
relationship with China. We should not shy away from speaking 
forthrightly about and contesting Chinese policies and actions that 
undermine the international order that has fostered peace and 
prosperity in the Indo-Pacific region for decades. We should continue 
to work with China on important issues, from North Korea to countering 
the flow of illegal opioids to encouraging greater protection of 
intellectual property rights. At the same time, we should draw a clear 
distinction where we disagree, and I will, if confirmed, remain 
committed to defending our values and championing human rights and 
fundamental freedoms around the world.

    Question 6. In his State of the Union speech, President Trump asked 
Congress to pass legislation to help ensure U.S. foreign assistance 
dollars ``always serve American interests, and only go to America's 
friends.'' How would a more transactional approach to U.S. foreign aid 
benefit U.S. interests? How would such a policy change shape U.S. 
foreign assistance in the Asia-Pacific?

    Answer. The FY 2019 budget request provides the necessary resources 
to advance peace and security, expand American influence, and address 
global crises, while making efficient use of taxpayer resources. It 
will modernize State Department and USAID diplomacy and development to 
advance a more secure and prosperous world by helping to support the 
development of more stable.
    I believe it is important to assess our foreign assistance 
carefully to make sure that it serves American interests. If confirmed, 
I look forward to working with Congress to ensure U.S. foreign 
assistance continues to serve American interests.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Francis R. Fannon by Senator Robert Menendez

U.S. Energy Diplomacy (specific countries)

    Question 1. Recent gas finds in the eastern Mediterranean have the 
potential to make Israel a net energy exporter for the first time in 
its history and have created opportunities for energy cooperation as 
well as potential conflict between Israel and its neighbors.

   What do you believe is the United States role in Middle East energy 
        diplomacy?

    Answer. The United States role in Middle East energy diplomacy is 
to engage nations throughout the region in support of our own energy 
security goals and the energy security of our partners. Our diplomacy 
should ensure that energy flowing from, into, and within the region is 
affordable, reliable, and from diversified sources. U.S. energy 
diplomacy should support increasing exports of U.S. energy resources 
and technologies to the region as appropriate. Further, the United 
States should ensure energy markets in the region are free and 
transparent so that U.S. businesses can compete fairly for new 
opportunities abroad. The United States is now a global leader on all 
energy fronts--particularly production and innovation--and we can work 
with our partners in the region to diversify their energy sectors, 
reduce vulnerabilities, and promote our mutual energy security 
interests.

    Question 2. Recent gas finds in the eastern Mediterranean have the 
potential to make Israel a net energy exporter for the first time in 
its history and have created opportunities for energy cooperation as 
well as potential conflict between Israel and its neighbors.

   If confirmed, what will your priorities be with respect to your 
        Bureau's engagement in the region?

    Answer. If confirmed, my priority for the Bureau of Energy 
Resources' engagement in the Middle East will be to support U.S. 
foreign policy goals, including the energy security of the United 
States and of our partners by ensuring the region contributes to stable 
and efficient global energy markets. In working with our partners in 
the Middle East to diversify their energy sectors, we can also 
encourage greater energy integration among them. We can strive for this 
by promoting a shared economic prosperity that can serve as the 
foundation for peace and better relations. Our engagement will seek to 
create new commercial opportunities in the Middle East for U.S. 
businesses and develop new export markets for U.S. energy resources, 
technologies, and services.

    Question 3. Lebanon's recent offshore gas tender includes part of 
Israel and Lebanon's disputed maritime border. Israeli Energy Minister 
Yuval Steinitz has said that a diplomatic resolution to the dispute 
``is preferable to threats'' but has also warned Lebanon not to explore 
in the disputed line of contact.

   If confirmed, how will you engage with both sides to resolve this 
        issue?

    Answer. I understand that both sides appreciate the strong prospect 
for the private sector to develop offshore resources in the vicinity of 
the disputed area should an arrangement between them be reached. If 
confirmed, and if there was interest in a U.S. role facilitating 
negotiations on the area of overlapping maritime claims by Israel and 
Lebanon, I would work with State Department colleagues to help the 
parties proceed in reaching a resolution quickly and in a manner 
acceptable to both Lebanon and Israel.

    Question 4. Lebanon's recent offshore gas tender includes part of 
Israel and Lebanon's disputed maritime border. Israeli Energy Minister 
Yuval Steinitz has said that a diplomatic resolution to the dispute 
``is preferable to threats'' but has also warned Lebanon not to explore 
in the disputed line of contact.

   Do you see any potential for cooperation between the two countries 
        (Lebanon and Israel)?

    Answer. I understand that both countries' officials are interested 
in drawing upon the best practices and lessons learned from developing 
and marketing offshore hydrocarbons elsewhere in the Eastern 
Mediterranean to develop their offshore resources for the benefit of 
their peoples. If confirmed, I would work with State Department 
colleagues to help the parties reach a resolution quickly and in a 
manner acceptable to both Lebanon and Israel.

    Question 5. Iraq, despite its hydrocarbon resources, is Iran's 
second largest export market for natural gas.

   How can improvements to Iraq's energy infrastructure improve its 
        domestic gas production capacity?

    Answer. Despite having the world's twelfth-largest gas reserves--
nearly 3.8 trillion cubic meters (tcm)--Iraq's natural gas production 
in 2016 was just 1,000 million cubic meters (mcm), lagging far behind 
the other hydrocarbon-producing countries in the region. Further, Iraq 
has the world's second-largest natural gas flaring rate and burns off 
about 48 mcm per day mcmd (representing about $2.5 billion in annual 
value lost). This gas flaring takes place because Iraq does not have 
the necessary gas processing and transport infrastructure.
    Iraq could alleviate the need for expensive imports, improve the 
reliability of its electricity delivery, and eventually become a major 
exporter of gas and petrochemicals if it addresses the flaring of 
associated gas at major oil production sites and develops its 
considerable domestic gas resources.
    I understand that American companies are already seeing success 
participating in Iraq's gas industry. GE is installing gas turbines in 
electrical plants and Orion Gas Processors recently announced a 
framework agreement to build facilities to capture the gas from a field 
in southern Iraq and to transform it into usable fuels. Other U.S. 
companies are engaging the Iraqi Ministry of Oil to help reduce gas 
flaring and to utilize this wasted resource.

    Question 6. Iraq, despite its hydrocarbon resources, is Iran's 
second largest export market for natural gas.

   If confirmed, how would you work with Iraq to lessen its dependence 
        on Iranian gas?

    Answer. Iraq began importing gas from Iran in June 2017--starting 
at 7 million cubic meters per day (mcmd), with the potential to 
increase significantly--resulting in an estimated $3.7 billion in 
annual revenue for Iran. By developing its own substantial natural gas 
resources, Iraq could significantly reduce its dependence on Iranian 
gas while building up its own energy infrastructure and economy.
    Assisting Iraq in reducing its dependence on Iranian gas must be an 
important part of the effort to improve Iraq's energy security. 
Increasing Iraq's resilience in the face of attempts to use energy as a 
source of foreign influence over Iraqi foreign and national security 
policies is an important policy priority. If confirmed, I would 
continue these efforts as a critical part of an overall strategy not 
only to support Iraq but also to mitigate Iran's ability to project 
malign influence throughout the region.

    Question 7. Do you believe clean energy cooperation with China and 
India is in the U.S. interest? Will you commit to continuing the 
separate bilateral efforts on clean energy development with China and 
India?

    Answer. I believe clean energy cooperation with China and India 
advances U.S. energy security and opportunities for U.S. business by 
advancing the broader objectives of supporting sustainable, 
transparent, and predictable international energy markets and promoting 
universal access to affordable and reliable energy.
    If confirmed, I will seek to advance secure, stable, diversified, 
and modern global energy systems that uses a broad range of market-
based energy solutions, including advanced energy technologies, 
renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy governance with China 
and India.

    Question 8. If confirmed, under your leadership, will ENR engage in 
countries when as asked for assistance and advice on pursuing energy 
development according to their self-determined interests?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I would support the Bureau of Energy 
Resources (ENR) promoting energy security for the United States and our 
partners and allies by promoting diverse global energy supplies from 
all energy sources. The United States is not in the business of picking 
winners and losers. ENR engagement, including assistance, promotes 
global political stability and prosperity through a multitude of 
avenues, including energy development and diversification. It is my 
understanding that ENR supports countries' in accordance with their 
self-determined preferences. If confirmed I would intend to continue 
this practice.

    Question 9. Will you commit to upholding the principles of self-
determination within the Power Africa program?

    Answer. Increasing electricity access in Sub-Saharan Africa is in 
the strategic interest of both the United States and African nations. 
Power Africa is a partnership. Its members--12 U.S. Government 
agencies, 16 like-minded bilateral and multilateral development 
partners, and more than 140 private sector companies--partner with 
African nations to help African leaders and citizens determine their 
own future. Power Africa works best when African Governments are 
committed to making the necessary reforms to attract investment in 
their power sectors. This also benefits the United States, opening 
opportunities for American investment in African economies.
    I understand that the Department of State utilizes ENR and our 
embassies to work with governments to strengthen enabling environments 
and implement the critical reforms that attract private investment in 
power generation, transmission, and distribution projects. When 
engaging on Power Africa, my understanding is that ENR respects the 
principle of self-determination with partner countries. If confirmed I 
would intend to continue this practice.

    Question 10. What host-country factors, beyond ENR's own resource 
and capacity constraints, would result in the U.S. limiting or 
restraining engagement on energy diplomacy?

    Answer. ENR, working with our energy officers in our embassies and 
with interagency colleagues, uses energy diplomacy and engagement to 
help resource-rich countries overcome investment climate issues that 
stifle economic growth and limit the ability of U.S. firms to compete 
fairly in those markets. If these countries can attract energy 
investments, especially cutting-edge energy technology from all energy 
sources, this will improve their own energy security and provide the 
foundation for economic growth, political stability, and democratic 
values.
    My understanding is that ENR focuses its efforts on countries 
seeking reform, U.S. allies and partners, and those with significant 
energy potential.

    Question 11. Do you believe that U.S. foreign energy policy and 
diplomacy encouraging foreign countries, particularly developing 
countries, to pursue the development of energy generation from imported 
fuels, comports with the broader U.S. foreign policy objective of 
ensuring that developing countries achieve self-reliance?

    Answer. U.S. national security benefits when other countries 
improve their energy security through domestic energy production and 
avoid overdependence on single suppliers. Access to affordable, 
reliable, diverse, and secure energy strengthens developing countries 
and their economic and political development. Diversification of fuel 
types, supply sources (countries of origin), and delivery routes also 
strengthens the energy security of those countries.
    The United States plays an important role in supporting the energy 
security of other countries through U.S. investments and U.S. exports 
of energy resources and technologies. In Eastern Europe, for example, 
U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) provides another option to countries 
which are overly dependent on Russian gas imports. U.S. companies, with 
their advanced technologies, are often vital to the development of the 
natural resources in other countries. Jamaica has increased its own 
energy security, and thereby reduced its dependence on Venezuelan oil 
imports, through the development of renewables and natural gas imports 
with the help of ENR's technical assistance.
    In addition to work regarding energy generation, I understand that 
ENR and U.S. embassies practice diplomacy and, in some cases, provide 
technical assistance to encourage transparency, the rule of law, and 
the establishment of proper institutional frameworks to attract long-
term energy investment. Proper Institutional frameworks can underpin 
economic development, political stability and promote shared democratic 
values.

    Question 12. What are your views on the need to balance domestic 
energy security with the energy interests of other nations?

    Answer. Countries can strengthen their own energy security through 
increasing domestic energy production, decreasing their dependence on a 
single foreign supplier, and seeking access to energy supplies through 
a variety of fuel types, sources of energy, and delivery routes. The 
United States has taken this approach. The boom in U.S. energy 
production has benefited U.S. consumers, boosted our exports, and 
increased our own national security. U. S. energy exports increases the 
energy security of other countries not only because the United States 
is a reliable, transparent supplier of all types of energy but also 
because U.S. exports increase the liquidity, price efficiency, and 
competitiveness of global hydrocarbon markets.

    Question 13. Would you oppose ENR engagement in facilitating energy 
resource development in countries that want U.S. technical expertise 
but may not want to import ``U.S. energy export?''

    Answer. If confirmed, I would support ENR promoting energy security 
for the United States and our partners and allies by promoting diverse 
global energy supplies from all energy sources. Facilitating the 
market-driven development of energy resources abroad provides 
opportunities for U.S. companies to invest and opportunities to export 
U.S. energy resources, technologies, and services including U.S. 
technical expertise. Doing so helps our allies and partners diversify 
their energy sources and bring economic gains back home. We believe in 
free and open markets. U.S. businesses are competitive across the 
energy sector in the development and provision of resources, 
technologies, and services. They can compete more effectively on a 
level playing field.

    Question 14. What assurances can you give me that the President, 
the NSC, or Sec. Tillerson share your perspective?

    Answer. President Trump and Secretary Tillerson have publicly 
supported increasing the energy security of the United States and our 
partners and allies through increased energy production, greater access 
to energy markets, fewer barriers to energy trade and development, and 
U.S. energy and energy technology exports. The President and Secretary 
recognize the importance of energy security in our economic system and 
to our national security.

    Question 15. Would you pushback against any such political pressure 
that is contrary to your understanding on what and with whom ENR should 
engage based on the administration's foreign economic principles?

    Answer. As I mentioned in my opening statement, if confirmed, I 
will focus on three objectives--energy security through diplomacy, 
governance, and electricity for all. These energy goals support the 
administration's own energy and foreign policy objectives.
Pipeline/Offshore Drilling
    Question 16. How do you account for the negative externalities to 
the American people of something like a cross-border pipeline, or 
offshore drilling, if the energy resources those efforts are supporting 
are being sent abroad?

    Answer. All energy infrastructure projects bring both positive and 
negative externalities. These projects, even where they support energy 
exports, support U.S. jobs and utilize U.S. expertise and technologies. 
We should identify and take into consideration all factors surrounding 
energy projects to help policy makers assess the overall national 
interest. If confirmed, I will work with the State Department and in 
the interagency so that policy makers take into account all 
externalities and points of view expressed about energy projects.

    Question 17. What degree of responsibility do you believe oil 
companies (versus taxpayers) should bear for disaster mitigation when 
oil industry operations cause a spill or disaster?

    Answer. The Department of State does not regulate oil industry 
operations. If confirmed, I will work with the appropriate government 
officials to assure that disaster mitigation strategies and response 
plans are as robust as possible, consistent with the scope of my 
responsibilities and applicable U.S. laws.

    Question 18. Do you believe bankruptcy protection should shield oil 
companies from liability and financial responsibilities to pay for 
cleanup and recovery efforts?

    Answer. The State Department does not have jurisdiction over 
bankruptcy issues. However, if confirmed, I will work to encourage the 
use of best practices by energy companies to help ensure they meet all 
applicable obligations for cleanup and recovery, consistent with the 
scope of my responsibilities and applicable U.S. laws.

    Question 19. If confirmed, how would you approach advising foreign 
governments, including developing countries and countries with 
concentrations of vulnerable populations living near energy resources 
or industrial areas, about public health, safety and liability 
regulation of energy developers?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will continue with ENR's efforts to 
strengthen energy sector governance, access, and reliability in 
emerging economies and build the capacity of governments to develop the 
energy resources of their countries for long-term national benefit. I 
understand that ENR foreign assistance programs are integral to the 
Bureau's diplomatic engagements overseas, provide critical support for 
the Department's objectives and the administration's global diplomacy 
priorities. ENR's programs leverage expertise from across the U.S. 
Government and leading U.S. universities and laboratories. Further, I 
understand that ENR's programs also provide access to qualified 
independent subject-matter experts and technical specialists to support 
the objectives to: 1) build institutional and human resource capacity 
needed to ensure strong energy sector governance and transparency in 
the resource sectors in emerging economies; 2) provide governments and 
civil society with the tools needed to help support responsible 
development of their domestic resources; and 3) support power market 
reforms and efforts to leverage regional electrical interconnections, 
strengthen energy security, and advance regional cooperation. If 
confirmed, I will seek to continue this important work.

    Question 20. Will you commit to engaging with civil society and 
local community representatives, including marginalized populations and 
women leaders, in your diplomatic engagements on energy development 
abroad?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to engage in discussions with all 
relevant stakeholders in the extractive industries including affected 
communities where these resources are located. ENR has for many years 
engaged actively with civil society representatives individually and 
within multilateral energy fora. ENR also has engaged on the important 
issue of gender and energy in multilateral engagements and through 
bilateral efforts.
    If confirmed, I will ensure the bureau continue its efforts to work 
with civil society in our diplomatic engagements on energy development 
abroad. I also will coordinate our efforts with our U.S. Agency for 
International Development colleagues to help ensure a unified message 
of engagement with civil society is implemented.

    Question 21. Will you describe your commitment to protecting human 
rights and preventing the exploitation of vulnerable populations and 
the approaches you will take to prioritize these imperatives in U.S. 
energy diplomacy?

    Answer. The protection of internationally recognized human rights 
is of paramount importance to the Department of State and to me. If 
confirmed, I will promote U.S. policies to advance these interests and 
share U.S. best practices regarding the responsible development of a 
country's domestic resources.
    ENR works with countries around the world to improve hydrocarbon 
and mineral sector governance and oversight and encourages universal 
access to affordable and reliable energy supply through power sector 
reform and development. I would continue our close collaboration with 
the U.S. Agency for International Development and work to connect the 
Governments of resource rich countries with international best 
practices for the sound and transparent governance of extractive 
resources.

    Question 22. How do you define or interpret ``U.S. energy 
exports,'' as described in Objective Goal 2.3.1 of the State Dept., and 
USAID's Joint Strategic Plan, and do you see it including facilitation 
of U.S. energy developers, not just fuels, gain access to foreign 
markets?

    Answer. I consider U.S. energy exports to include exports of our 
energy resources, technologies, equipment, and services. This approach 
is consistent with the National Security Strategy and the intent of the 
Department's Joint Strategic Plan Objective 2.3.1. U.S. exports, 
whether commodities, goods, or services, help our allies and partners 
diversify their energy sources and improve their energy security, and 
importantly, they also promote economic growth and job creation here in 
the United States. U.S. energy companies (including energy developers) 
are part of that strategic and economic value chain.
    It is important to ensure a level playing field though reduction of 
barriers that hinder U.S. companies from competing in foreign markets 
and advocacy on behalf of U.S. companies. If confirmed, I would work to 
ensure the Bureau will advance fair and reciprocal economic 
relationships in the energy sector.

    Question 23. Is ``energy exports'' code for fossil fuels? If not, 
what else are we talking about and do others like President Trump, 
Secretaries Perry and Tillerson, and Ambassador Craft agree that we are 
talking about something other than coal, oil or gas?

    Answer. The Trump administration has repeatedly and publicly called 
for an `all-of-the-above' approach to energy. The President's National 
Security Strategy (December 2017) states that the United States will 
promote exports of its energy resources, technologies, and services. It 
makes no distinction between fossil and non-fossil energy and does not 
seek to pick winners and losers. The United States is fortunate to be a 
leader in energy development, production, and innovation across the 
entire range of energy sources. As such, I understand that ENR promotes 
U.S. exports of energy resources, technologies, and services--including 
highly efficient fossil fuels and renewables--through engagement with 
foreign governments to ensure fair and reciprocal treatment for U.S. 
companies operating in overseas markets. The Bureau also works in 
partner nations to build institutional capacity; provides the tools to 
support responsible resource development; and, supports power market 
reforms, all of which advance administration priorities and allow our 
partners to make fully informed, market-based decisions.

    Question 24. How would ENR ``promote'' U.S. oil or coal exports in 
foreign policy when these commodities are traded globally based on 
global market prices per unit, and that the basic economic principles 
of supply and demand determine production and sales?

    Answer. ENR promotes U.S. oil and coal exports by promoting open, 
transparent, and market-based energy sectors and removing barriers to 
trade, which increases opportunities for U.S. energy exporters 
regardless of fluctuations in commodities prices. ENR promotes energy 
security for U.S. allies and partners, which includes the 
diversification of energy sources, supplies, and routes. As the United 
States is a reliable supplier and a recent exporter of multiple energy 
resources, ENR has been able to promote U.S. energy exports, including 
oil, coal, and liquefied natural gas, to strengthen global energy 
security. ENR furthers U.S. energy technology exports, including 
advanced clean coal power generation equipment, through commercial 
advocacy. ENR also supports the transformation of electricity markets 
in key countries, helping to develop the transparent and competitive 
market mechanisms that often make low-cost fuels the most efficient 
choice of power supply.

    Question 25. What is your experience in facilitating ``alternative 
energy'' development and how does it compare with your experience (in 
terms of time and scope) with fossil fuel energy development?

    Answer. I have considerable experience working with both fossil-
based and non-fossil based energy. As such, it is difficult to assess 
time and scope with precision in light of this overlap.
    For example, while serving as senior Legislative Assistant to 
Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, I drafted Good Samaritan legislation 
which sought to promote the clean-up of abandoned hard rock mines that 
were leaching into and harming watersheds. As counsel to the Senate 
Committee on Environment & Public Works committee, I drafted and 
negotiated a variety of provisions to the Energy Policy Act of 2005, 
including the motor fuels title, which established the Renewable Fuels 
Program.
    As head of Murphy Oil Corporation's government affairs function, I 
worked on a variety of oil and natural gas projects in the U.S. and 
elsewhere. Yet, I also supported Murphy Oil's acquisition of Hankinson 
Renewable Energy, a significant ethanol plant based in Hankinson, North 
Dakota.
    BHP Billiton is the world's largest diversified resources company. 
As head of their Washington office, I supported the company's oil and 
gas operations. I also supported BHP's sale of U.S. coal mines, in 
particular of its Navajo coal mine to the Navajo Nation. That 
transaction represented a meaningful act of the Navajo Nation's right 
to self-determination, as it turned the prior owner, BHP, into their 
employee.
    In addition, as a ``diversified resources company,'' BHP invested 
in other commodities that were foundational to ``alternative energy.'' 
For example, solar and electric vehicles require significantly more 
copper than coal-based generation or internal combustion engines. BHP 
owns and operates the world's largest copper mine. I supported BHP's 
public rollout of its Climate Change: Portfolio Scenario Analysis. That 
document and others illustrated that irrespective of potential policy 
scenarios, the company projected significant growth. The company's 
diversity of commodities meant that it could reallocate investment to 
whatever commodity would flourish.

    Question 26. If the contrast is great, will you commit to 
recruiting experts to manage this important part of ENR's portfolio?

    Answer. I believe in the importance of diversity in terms of 
cultures, genders and points of view. If confirmed, I commit to recruit 
the best experts to advance ENR's portfolio.

    Question 27. Do you believe it is appropriate for ENR to endorse or 
promote particular energy technologies or products?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will support an all of the above 
international energy policy that strengthens the energy security of the 
United States and our allies. Maintaining market access for U.S. energy 
products, technologies and services, and ensuring sustainable, 
transparent, and predictable international energy markets for our 
partners and ourselves is crucial to our security. ENR is not in the 
business of picking winners and losers. However, ENR does leverage its 
technical expertise to provide solutions that are appropriate for 
different contexts. I recognize that market-informed laws and 
regulations are essential to balancing emissions reduction and economic 
growth goals. Laws and regulations should be performance-based and 
technology neutral.

    Question 28. What do you believe the President meant when he said 
in the State of The Union on January 20, 2018: ``I am asking the 
Congress to pass legislation to help ensure American foreign Assistance 
dollars always serve American interests, and only go to our friends.?''

    Answer. The President is committed to ensuring that American 
foreign assistance serves American interests. The 2019 Budget 
prioritizes assistance that protects the American people, promotes U.S. 
prosperity, and advances American interests and values.

    Question 29. How do you believe a policy that ``ensure[s] American 
foreign Assistance dollars always serve American interests, and only go 
to our friends'' would, or should, be carried by the ENR bureau?

    Answer. It is important to assess our foreign assistance based on a 
number of factors, with the top reason being that our assistance should 
serve American interests. Countries' support for U.S. priorities in 
international fora is one indicator to consider, but there are other 
important factors to consider as well.

    Question 30. Do you believe the U.S. should limit diplomatic and 
development engagements to our ``friends?'' Who are our ``friends?'' 
Would you agree that disengaging with nations who may not necessarily 
be our ``friends'' could create opportunities for our global 
competitors like Russia and China, or extremist elements like Boko 
Haram and ISIS, to fill the void we create?

    Answer. The U.S. Government has a longstanding policy of using 
diplomacy and development not only to strengthen existing friendships 
but to build new ones, and to pursue pragmatic and constructive 
relationships even with those governments with which there are many 
areas of deep disagreement. For this reason, the United States 
maintains broad and continuing dialogues not only with our closest 
partners and allies but with strategic competitors. The Trump 
administration has stated its commitment to use America's influence to 
promote peace, prosperity, and the development of successful societies. 
If confirmed, I would uphold this commitment and ensure the Department 
of State uses energy diplomacy to establish a stable, secure, and 
resilient global energy supply, to strengthen the transparency and 
efficiency of global energy markets, and to promote universal access to 
affordable and reliable energy. Achieving these goals will require the 
United States to broaden the consensus behind these core principles by 
reaching beyond its traditional partners and allies. There is also a 
clear need to prevent foreign powers, criminal groups, or terrorist 
organizations from using political and economic influence or overt acts 
of violence to undermine these goals. If confirmed, I would continue 
State Department efforts to ensure energy resources are not used for 
malign political ends or to finance criminal or terrorist activities.

    Question 31. If a country determines its best interests are to 
mobilize its own domestic energy resources, i.e. not import of U.S. 
fossil fuels, would that count against considering them ``an economic 
partner of the U.S.'' or not a ``friend?''

    Answer. If confirmed, I will continue the State Department's work 
to lower barriers to investment, improve commercial climates, and 
ensure U.S. energy companies are able to compete on a level playing 
field across the globe, and I am confident that U.S. energy exports 
will continue not only to compete but to thrive in the years ahead.
    Yet, it is unrealistic to think that U.S. exports alone will solve 
the world's energy security challenges. As such, the United States is a 
strong supporter of the right of every country to develop its own 
sovereign national resources in pursuit of national security and 
prosperity. The strong and vocal support of the United States for 
projects such as the Southern Gas Corridor--a project that will not 
transport a single molecule of U.S.-origin natural gas, but will help 
our partners and allies in Europe improve the diversity and stability 
of their energy supply--demonstrates a commitment to energy security 
that is distinct from efforts to promote the export of U.S. energy 
resources, services, and technologies. If confirmed, I will promote 
energy security even where U.S. energy exports are not directly 
implicated.

    Question 32. Was your departure from BHP at all related to the 
company's portfolio shift towards less carbon intensive activities and 
changes in political and federal strategy with respect to climate 
change have anything to do with your departure?

    Answer. No. BHP did not and would not shift its business strategy 
according to political changes in the U.S. or anywhere else in the 
world. BHP views its investments and operational decisions according to 
50 plus year time horizons. Further, BHP's commodity diversity provides 
a high degree of resilience under any potential global policy scenario. 
In fact, my work with BHP on scenario analysis and disclosure issues, 
among others, was foundational to my decision to form a bipartisan 
energy and environment consultancy, The Coefficient Group.

    Question 33. Will you commit to staffing the ENR bureau with 
professional staff at all levels with diverse experience, expertise and 
background to ensure ENR remains effective in delivering in all areas 
of the Bureau's ``all of the above'' approach to energy diplomacy.

    Answer. I take issues of diversity and inclusion very seriously, 
which have been shaped by my personal and professional experience. As I 
indicated in my opening statement, my mother and her family immigrated 
to the United States in 1969 with little more than an aspiration for a 
better life. I saw firsthand the importance of inclusion of diverse 
nationalities and ethnicities. Professionally, I have worked with 
diverse and multi-cultural teams to advance commercial ventures. I have 
a keen appreciation for the benefits that diversity in culture and 
perspective can bring to any endeavor.
    I believe in the importance of diversity in terms of cultures, 
genders and points of view. If confirmed, I commit to recruit the best 
experts to advance ENR's ``all of the above'' approach to energy 
diplomacy, and will seek to build and retain a diverse team and ensure 
that all are meaningfully included at all levels of the organization.

    Question 34. Executive Order 13770, ``Ethics Commitments by 
Executive Branch Appointees,'' requires every appointee so sign a 
pledge which states that they ``will not for a period of 2 years after 
the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter on 
which I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment or 
participate in the specific issue area in which that particular matter 
falls.''
    As a lobbyist for BHP Billiton, you submitted disclosures that 
state the specific issue areas you lobbied on over the past two years. 
Many of these specific issue areas appear to fall within the scope of 
work for the position to which you have been nominated. At our meeting 
in my office and at your nomination hearing, you said that State 
Department ethics lawyers were going to ``carve out'' these issue 
areas.
    Listed below are some of the relevant specific issue areas that you 
lobbied on over the past two years. For each one, please explain how 
the specific issue area does not apply to the work of the ENR Bureau 
or, if it does, how the State Department will create ``carve outs'' 
that would allow you to fulfill the full scope of responsibilities for 
this position without having to recuse yourself from any matter or seek 
a waiver for EO 13770.

          34a. Issues related to methane emissions (no bill)

    Answer. This matter related to BHP's participation in ``One 
Future,'' an industry group comprised of companies throughout the 
natural gas value chain committed to reduce their methane emissions to 
a collective ``one percent.'' BHP supported One Future's mission and 
sought to promote voluntary methane emissions reductions with U.S. EPA.
    One Future is a domestic U.S. organization and EPA's proposed 
methane emissions programs were wholly domestic. As such, this is not a 
particular matter or specific issue area that I would anticipate 
working on as Assistant Secretary for the Energy Resources Bureau if I 
am confirmed.

          34b. Issues related to climate change (no bill)

    Answer. BHP has agreed with the United Nations' views on climate 
change and IPCC reports since the early 2000s. The company has shared 
its views consistently since that time.
    I supported BHP's public roll-out of its report, ``Climate Change: 
Portfolio Analysis'' and subsequent, ``Climate Change: Portfolio 
Analysis Views After Paris.''
    If confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and 
will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from 
particular matters in which BHP is a party. Further, the roll-out of 
BHP's Climate Change reports did not involve the Energy Resources 
Bureau, and I would not expect any promotion of those reports before 
the Energy Resources Bureau in the future.

          34c. Issues related to climate change, including carbon 
        capture sequestration, conservation, and general climate change 
        policies (no bill)

    Answer. BHP has agreed with the United Nations' views on climate 
change and IPCC reports since the early 2000s. The company has shared 
its views consistently since that time.
    I supported BHP's public roll-out of its report, ``Climate Change: 
Portfolio Analysis'' and subsequent, ``Climate Change: Portfolio 
Analysis Views After Paris.'' This included sharing the report with 
officials during the former administration.
    BHP signed a partnership agreement with Beijing-based, Peking 
University to research potential application for carbon capture 
utilization and storage in the steelmaking process. I supported the 
company's public roll-out of this initiative. This included sharing 
notification of this initiative with officials during the former 
administration.
    If confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and 
will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from matters 
in which BHP is a party. Further, neither the roll-out of BHP's Climate 
Change reports nor the partnership with Peking University involved the 
Energy Resources Bureau, and I would not expect those matters to come 
before the Energy Resources Bureau in the future.

          34d. Financial transparency issues (no bill)

    Answer. BHP supported U.S. adoption of mandatory disclosure of 
extractive industry payments to governments. This included BHP's 
support of section 1504 of the Wall Street Reform and Consumer 
Protection Act. As noted, this matter concerned SEC regulations, and 
BHP's work on this issue does not relate to the Bureau of Energy 
Resources,
    If confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and 
will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from matters 
in which BHP is a party.

          34e. Extractives Industry Transparency Initiative (no bill)

    Answer. I was listed along with BHP's other registered lobbyist on 
all filings as a routine matter, rather than removing me and putting me 
back on LDA filings. BHP supported U.S. adoption of EITI. However, 
BHP's other lobbyist worked on the U.S. EITI issues.
    The Department of Interior noticed its withdrawal from U.S. 
participation of EITI in light of legal privacy restrictions and low 
participation rates. In light of this withdrawal and that I did not 
work on the issue, there is no prospect of triggering Executive Order 
13770's restrictions related to past lobbying if I am confirmed.

          34f. Issues related to climate change policy, including 
        carbon capture and sequestration and voluntary methane 
        reductions (no bill)

    Answer. BHP has agreed with the United Nations' views on climate 
change and IPCC reports since the early 2000s. The company has shared 
its views consistently since that time.
    I supported BHP's public roll-out of its report, ``Climate Change: 
Portfolio Analysis'' and subsequent, ``Climate Change: Portfolio 
Analysis Views After Paris.'' This included sharing the report with 
officials during the former administration.
    BHP signed a partnership agreement with Beijing-based, Peking 
University to research potential application for carbon capture 
utilization and storage in the steelmaking process. I supported the 
company's public roll-out of this initiative. This included sharing 
notification of this initiative with officials during the former 
administration.
    Additionally, BHP participated in ``One Future,'' an industry group 
comprised of companies throughout the natural gas value chain committed 
to reduce their methane emissions to a collective ``one percent.'' BHP 
supported One Future's mission and sought to promote voluntary methane 
emissions reductions with U.S. EPA.
    One Future is a domestic U.S. organization and EPA's proposed 
methane emissions programs were wholly domestic.
    If confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and 
will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from matters 
in which BHP is a party. Further, neither the roll-out of BHP's Climate 
Change reports, the partnership with Peking University, nor One Future 
initiative involved the Energy Resources Bureau, and I would not expect 
those matters to come before the Energy Resources Bureau in the future.

          34g. Issues related to NAFTA renegotiation

    Answer. BHP won the right to develop the Trion field with partner 
PEMEX in Mexico's offshore leasing. BHP was interested in understanding 
how NAFTA renegotiations could affect the development of that 
discovered resource.
    BHP's inquiries did not involve the Bureau of Energy Resources. 
Further, if confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel 
and will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from BHP.

          34h. Issues related to energy policy priorities

    Answer. BHP has shale resources across four regions in three U.S. 
states. ``Energy policy priorities'' relates to BHP's interest in 
better understanding the direction of the U.S. Government policy 
priorities that could affect its production profile.
    BHP's inquiries, which focused on domestic policy, did not involve 
the Bureau of Energy Resources. Further, if confirmed, I will follow 
the directions of Ethics counsel and will adhere to my ethics pledge, 
which requires a recusal from BHP.

          34i. Issues related to energy security (no bill)

    Answer. Two BHP executives visited Washington from Australia. I was 
listed, along with my other former BHP registered lobbyist colleague 
because we supported them in preparation for their trip. Neither of us 
participated in the meeting that this filing references.
    Neither my own work nor the White House meeting that I did not 
attend involved matters before the Bureau of Energy Resources. Further, 
if confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and will 
adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from BHP.

          34j. Issues related to climate change policy, including the 
        Paris accords and carbon capture and sequestration technology 
        and funding (no bill)

    Answer. BHP has agreed with the United Nations' views on climate 
change and IPCC reports since the early 2000s. The company has shared 
its views consistently since that time.
    I supported BHP's public roll-out of its report, ``Climate Change: 
Portfolio Analysis'' and subsequent, ``Climate Change: Portfolio 
Analysis Views After Paris.'' This included sharing the report with 
officials during the former administration.
    BHP signed a partnership agreement with Beijing-based, Peking 
University to research potential application for carbon capture 
utilization and storage in the steelmaking process. I supported the 
company's public roll-out of this initiative. This included sharing 
notification of this initiative with officials during the former 
administration.
    If confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and 
will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from matters 
in which BHP is a party. Further, neither the roll-out of BHP's Climate 
Change reports nor the partnership with Peking University involved the 
Energy Resources Bureau, and I would not expect those matters to come 
before the Energy Resources Bureau in the future.

          34k. Issues related to global commodities trade policy (no 
        legislation or trade agreement discussed)

    Answer. As the world's largest diversified resources company, BHP 
closely monitors and conducts various scenario analyses on the demand 
for various commodities.
    I supported BHP in sharing their views with officials serving 
during the former administration. This effort to share views with 
administration officials did not involve the Bureau of Energy 
Resources.
    If confirmed, I will follow the directions of Ethics counsel and 
will adhere to my ethics pledge, which requires a recusal from BHP.

    Question 35. While working for Murphy Oil, what specifically did 
you lobby on regarding ``all provisions relating to the regulation of 
retail tobacco sales'' in the Family Prevention and Tobacco Control 
Act? Did you lobby to weaken the bill in any way, including with regard 
to warning labels on tobacco products?

    Answer. At the time in 2008, Murphy Oil Corporation owned and 
operated a network of retail fueling stations. Murphy's retail business 
was a member of the National Association of Convenience Stores (NACS). 
As a NACS member, Murphy's retail business participated in NACS-related 
advocacy programs. NACS sought what it contended were practical and 
fair changes to the proposed legislation. The House Energy & Commerce 
agreed to modify their bill and President Obama signed the legislation 
into law.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Francis R. Fannon by Senator John Barrasso

    Question 1. Have you read the Inspector General's report?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 2. What specific steps would you take to deal with the 
duplication, redundancies, and confusing lines of authorities on 
international energy policy that are outlined in that report?

    Answer. The U.S. Constitution empowers the President with authority 
to ``make treaties'' with advice and consent of the Senate. In 
establishing the Department of State in 1789, Congress provided that 
``[t]he The Secretary of State shall perform such duties . respecting 
foreign affairs as the President of the United States shall assign to 
the Department, and he shall conduct the business of the Department in 
such manner as the President shall direct.''
    In establishing the Department of Energy in 1977, Congress provided 
that ``the Secretary of State shall continue to exercise primary 
authority for the conduct of foreign policy relating to energy and 
nuclear nonproliferation.'' Although the Department of State has 
primary authority on foreign policy, it has coordinated and 
collaborated with respective experts across the cabinet in the interest 
of the American people.
    For example, the Department broadly, and the Bureau of Energy 
Resources more specifically has a strong history of meaningful and 
effective collaboration. For example, ENR worked closely with the 
Department of Defense (DoD) and the intelligence community to identify 
key energy infrastructure in Syria, allowing DoD to target and degrade 
ISIS' ability to produce and sell oil, thereby eliminating a key 
revenue source for the terrorist organization. ENR also collaborates 
with the Department of Treasury in the design and implementation of 
energy-related sanctions on Russia and North Korea.
    The Office of Inspector General report raised legitimate concerns 
over ``Interagency Coordination'' between DoE and State. However, the 
report did not provide specific recommendations for improvement on this 
matter as the OIG did in multiple other instances. This fact, coupled 
with the report itself as well as my own understanding, suggests that 
concerns raised reflected management failures.
    If confirmed, I intend to meet regularly with respective peers 
across the interagency and Departments of Defense and Treasury, in 
particular to better understand their processes for collaboration. I 
will also meet with DoE leaders, many of whom I have known and worked 
with beginning in 2001, and seek to build on the established best 
practice working across the interagency. There is absolutely no reason 
that the Department of State cannot work collaboratively to advance 
American foreign policy objectives as it does elsewhere across the 
interagency. I take seriously the responsibilities before me, and if 
confirmed, pledge to advance ``foreign policy relating to energy'' ``in 
such manner as the President shall direct.'' This necessarily requires 
working with all parties to advance American interests.

    Question 3. What efforts has the administration taken to 
effectively demonstrate that the United States opposes Nord Stream II?

    Answer. I understand that the administration has taken a very 
active approach to convey its clear opposition to the proposed Nord 
Stream II pipeline through public statements and private diplomatic 
engagement. Secretary Tillerson publicly affirmed in Warsaw on January 
29 that, ``the United States opposes the Nord Stream 2 pipeline. We see 
it as undermining Europe's overall energy security and stability, and 
it provides Russia yet another tool to politicize energy..'' The 
Secretary went on to state, ``Nord Stream II would continue to keep 
Europe more dependent on Russia for natural gas.[and].it also allows 
Russia to now use the natural gas supply system as a political tool to 
create more pressure on countries like Ukraine and elsewhere.'' 
Secretary Tillerson stated earlier, at the Wilson Center in Washington 
in November 2017, ``we continue to view the development of pipelines 
like the Nord Stream II and the multiline TurkStream as unwise, as they 
only increase market dominance from a single supplier to Europe.''
    Other Senior State Department officials as well as other federal 
agencies have affirmed this position publicly at home and abroad. I 
understand that the Department has also engaged in vigorous private 
multilateral and bilateral diplomatic engagement with a wide range of 
European counterparts and private sector officials.

    Question 4. Do you support imposing sanctions on Russian energy 
export pipelines, like Nord Stream II?

    Answer. Sanctions on Russian energy export pipelines, in accordance 
with CAATSA Section 232, can be a powerful tool to change the behavior 
of the Russian Federation. Proponents of the Nord Stream II pipeline 
have stated publicly that the existence of these sanctions has 
increased project financing costs for Nord Stream II. I cannot 
speculate on potential future sanctions actions; however, I would 
consider supporting the imposition of sanctions on Russian energy 
export pipelines, consistent with the public guidance issued by 
Secretary Tillerson on CAATSA Section 232. Any decision to implement 
such sanctions should be coordinated with our European allies, as 
envisioned by the law, in order to preserve trans-Atlantic unity on 
Russia sanctions.

    Question 5. If confirmed, how will you assist U.S. businesses and 
industries in gaining greater access to global markets?

    Answer. In support of the National Security Strategy, I will ensure 
the Bureau of Energy Resources (ENR) advocates for an open, 
transparent, and market-based global energy sector that advances U.S. 
economic interests. I will also lead Bureau efforts to promote exports 
of U.S. energy resources, including coal, to strengthen global energy 
security and to help our allies and partners become more resilient 
against those that use energy to coerce.
    ENR has a meaningful role to play to help level the playing field 
and open markets. Currently several geologically abundant countries may 
present prohibitive above ground risk profiles. As I noted in my 
opening statement, if confirmed, I will seek to focus ENR's work on 
governance and transparency to open markets for U.S. interests.
    If confirmed, I will also advocate for U.S. energy firms to gain 
greater access to global markets to sustain U.S. economic growth and 
job creation.

    Question 6. If confirmed, would you ensure that the State 
Department is promoting all forms of energy projects across the globe, 
including oil, gas, and coal?

    Answer. I believe that maintaining market access for U.S. energy 
resources, technologies, and services, and ensuring sustainable, 
transparent, and open international energy markets for our partners and 
ourselves is crucial to our economic and energy security. I fully 
support an ``all of the above'' approach and recognize that advocating 
for the full range of energy sources allows the United States to 
advance a diversified energy supply across multiple global contexts. It 
is not our job to pick winners and losers.
    During my confirmation hearing, Foreign Relations committee Ranking 
Member Menendez asked my views on a related topic. I offered that it 
was my understanding that ENR is fuel source ``agnostic,'' and that 
``it's truly an all-of-the-above approach . . . And so it wouldn't be a 
weighted measure of one fuel source over another.''
    If confirmed, I will seek to promote a secure, stable, diversified, 
and modern global energy system that uses a broad range of market-based 
energy solutions including advanced energy technologies, coal, oil, 
natural gas, renewable energy, energy efficiency, and energy governance 
solutions to advance U.S. interests, promote global energy security, 
and drive economic development.

    Question 7. With billions of people without power, do you believe 
we should be promoting fossil fuels that are affordable and reliable, 
such as coal and natural gas, while supporting new technologies that 
reduce their carbon output?

    Answer. Promoting universal access to affordable and reliable 
energy using an ``all of the above'' approach promotes energy security 
and economic growth for the United States and our partners and allies. 
In response to Foreign Relations committee Ranking Member Menendez 
during my confirmation hearing I stated that it was my understanding 
that ENR is fuel source ``agnostic,'' and that ``it's truly an all-of-
the-above approach ... And so it wouldn't be a weighted measure of one 
fuel source over another.''
    If confirmed, I will work closely with the interagency, industry 
representatives, international organizations, and partner countries to 
help communities around the world access and use fossil fuels more 
cleanly and efficiently and also to deploy renewable and other clean 
energy sources in line with a market-based approach. Related laws and 
regulations should be performance-based and technology neutral. If 
confirmed, I would also seek to support the transformation of 
electricity markets around the globe, helping to develop transparent 
and competitive market mechanisms to facilitate the most efficient 
choice of power supply.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
            Francis R. Fannon by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in 
the Civil and Foreign Service?

   What steps will you take to ensure your supervisors are fostering 
        an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

    Answer. I take issues of diversity and inclusion very seriously, 
which have been shaped by my personal and professional experience. As I 
indicated in my opening statement, my mother and her family immigrated 
to the United States in 1969 with little more than an aspiration for a 
better life. I saw firsthand the importance of inclusion of diverse 
nationalities and ethnicities. Professionally, I have worked with 
diverse and multi-cultural teams to advance commercial ventures. I have 
a keen appreciation for the benefits that diversity in culture and 
perspective can bring to any endeavor.
    If confirmed, I will seek to build and retain a diverse team and 
ensure that all are meaningfully included at all levels of the 
organization. In my view, the State Department would be a natural 
leader in demonstrating diversity and inclusion given its global 
mandate.

    Question 2. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 3. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 4. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in the energy sector?

    Answer. Yes. I am committed to ensuring that my official actions 
will not give rise to a conflict of interest. I will divest my 
interests in those companies the State Department Ethics Office deemed 
necessary to avoid a conflict of interest, and will remain vigilant 
with regard to my ethics obligations.

    Question 5. Does Russia represent a serious threat to European 
stability and prosperity?

    Answer. Yes, Russia represents a serious threat to European 
stability and prosperity. Its occupation and attempted annexation of 
Crimea in 2014, as well as its aggression in eastern Ukraine, 
demonstrate a lack of respect for the rules-based order that has 
ensured Europe's peace and prosperity since the end of World War II.
    Russia uses its energy resources to advance its geopolitical goals 
in Europe. Overdependence on a sole supplier of energy creates leverage 
for politicizing these vital resources. Russia demonstrated its 
willingness to use this leverage to achieve its geopolitical objectives 
when it disrupted gas supply to and through Ukraine in 2006, 2009, and 
2014, harming Ukraine and other Eastern European countries. Europe's 
diversification of fuel energy sources, types, and routes is critical 
to reducing Russia's leverage and ensuring Europe's continued stability 
and prosperity.

    Question 6. Do you agree that Russia/Gazprom manipulates European 
gas markets because Russia prioritizes the strategic and geopolitical 
value of its gas resources over revenue generation?

    Answer. Russia has demonstrated its willingness to leverage its 
role as Europe's single largest supplier of natural gas for strategic 
and geopolitical ends, notwithstanding its dependence on hydrocarbon 
exports for a significant portion of its state budget.
    Russia/Gazprom's decision to invest billions in the Nord Stream II 
and Turkish Stream projects in order to bypass Ukraine as a gas transit 
state, deprive Ukraine of gas transit revenue, and sever a vital link 
to the European Union is a clear example of prioritizing strategic ends 
over market rationale. Its willingness to prioritize geopolitical 
leverage over revenue generation by disrupting gas supply to and 
through Ukraine in 2006, 2009, and 2014, which harmed Ukraine and other 
Eastern European countries, serves as another example.

    Question 7. How would you characterize Russian interference in the 
Krk Island project?

    Answer. Russia uses a number of overt and covert approaches to 
influence public opinion and the policies of other governments. Russian 
disinformation campaigns aim to discredit energy infrastructure 
projects in Eastern and Central Europe and preserve Russia's dominant 
market position. Russia then uses its dominant market position to 
advance its own projects and further Russia's geopolitical goals in 
Europe.
    As with other energy diversification projects in the region, Russia 
has attempted to use economic tools such as contract terms and 
unrealistic promises of investments and ancillary projects to undermine 
commitments both in Croatia and in Hungary, the two markets key to 
determining the Krk project's viability. Russia offers tantalizing 
projects to maintain its dominant position in vulnerable markets such 
as a multiline TurkStream, to undercut other proposals that would 
promote real diversification.

    Question 8. What specific steps will you take to counter Russian 
efforts to oppose to Krk?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will focus Bureau of Energy Resources 
(ENR)'s diplomatic efforts on encouraging Croatia and regional partners 
such as Hungary to move forward with the deployment of an offshore 
Floating Storage and Regasification Unit (FSRU) at Croatia's Krk 
Island. We will continue to highlight the importance and benefits of 
diversification and emphasize the need for countries to invest in their 
own energy security. The United States also plans to provide technical 
assistance to support this project consistent with U.S. support of 
projects that advance energy security through energy diversification.
    I understand and support the administration's ongoing, 
comprehensive approach to countering Russian malign influence in the 
region. This work focuses on responding to Russian disinformation and 
propaganda, exposing Russian influence operations as such, building 
resilience in partner governments and populations, countering 
corruption, building the capacity of an independent news media, 
developing information-sharing mechanisms with partner nations, and 
increasing the cost of these destabilizing activities on those that 
carry them out.

    Question 9. Because of Russia's strategic imperative behind its gas 
supplies and deliveries, do you believe promoting U.S. gas exports to 
Europe will solve this problem?

    Answer. U.S. gas exports can be one element of a multi-faceted 
response to reduce the leverage Russia holds over Europe through energy 
supplies. U.S. gas exports will increase the supply of gas available 
for purchase worldwide, contributing to a global, liquid market for 
natural gas, all of which supports Europe's efforts to diversify its 
sources, supplies, and routes for gas. However, Europe itself must play 
the central role in reducing Russia's energy leverage over the 
continent. Through infrastructure investments, including LNG terminals 
and gas interconnectors, and the creation and implementation of robust 
legal and regulatory regimes, like the Third Energy Package, Europe can 
ensure that Russian firms are compelled to adhere to market principles.

    Question 10. Do you think U.S. gas suppliers are willing to supply 
gas, at a potential loss, if Russia effectively drives down the price 
of gas in Europe's regional markets?

    Answer. ENR and our interagency colleagues advocate for European 
energy security, including access to U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG). 
However, the U.S. Government does not direct our private companies 
regarding where to sell their products and, likewise, does not set 
prices. U.S. private sector companies operate according to their own 
commercial terms in the best interest of their shareholders. As such, 
it is unlikely that they would supply gas to Europe at a loss in the 
long-term. The United States and U.S. firms contribute to global energy 
security through their demonstrated respect for and advancement of 
market principles and increased natural gas supplies and build a 
global, liquid and transparent market.
    European Union efforts to increase its own energy security by 
diversifying its energy mix have served to reduce Russia's market 
dominance and ability to set prices. Gazprom/Russia flourishes in 
opaque systems where it can exploit prospective importing countries 
through unfair and manipulative practices. By contrast, increased 
access to LNG and new energy distribution channels and sources 
introduces market competition that will force Gazprom to compete in a 
more open, rules-based marketplace. For example, Lithuania 
substantially reduced its dependence on Russian gas after it opened an 
LNG import facility in 2014. As a result of Lithuania's newfound market 
leverage, Gazprom reduced the price of Lithuania's 2005-2015 supply 
contract by 20 percent.

    Question 11. What would your strategy be to ``promote an increase 
in U.S. energy exports,'' as described in Performance Goal 2.3.1 in the 
State and USAID Joint Strategic Plan, where regional prices for certain 
energy products is especially challenging for certain U.S. energy 
product suppliers, or when the price of energy commodities depresses 
demand for those commodities produced in the U.S.?

    Answer. A strategy to promote an increase in U.S. energy exports 
includes identifying infrastructure and energy sector opportunities 
overseas for U.S. companies, facilitating rigorous and efficient 
permitting of safe and efficient cross-border infrastructure, and 
advocating for U.S. companies entering new markets. The strategy 
presumes working with multilateral, foreign and domestic energy 
stakeholders to strengthen good governance, increase transparency, and 
remove barriers to energy development and trade for U.S. companies. 
Finally, it would include providing technical assistance, sharing of 
U.S. best practices, and communicating opportunities and risks to 
governments and industry to advance U.S. energy priorities and 
businesses.
    The Department of State can further grow export opportunities for 
U.S. energy technology and commodity exporters irrespective of 
commodity market fluctuations by opening new markets through the 
promotion of U.S. financial and business models to support the 
transformation of electricity markets. The flexibility and 
responsiveness of U.S. exporters, the cost efficiencies gained through 
technological advances in U.S. production, and the reliability of U.S. 
supply make the United States a preferred exporter. Technology and 
reliability also make the United States an attractive partner and 
supplier. If confirmed, I will work to maximize all of these levers to 
grow U.S. energy and energy technology exports.

    Question 12. Would you agree that a balanced, and multi-faceted, 
strategy to combat Russian energy influence in the region, that 
includes technical assistance on regulatory reforms and power 
generation and transmission capacity, financial assistance and 
facilitation of U.S. private sector investments in domestic energy 
resource mobilization, is necessary for success?

    Answer. A balanced approach is important to counter Russian energy 
influence in Europe. Russia uses its position as the largest natural 
gas supplier to Europe to apply pressure throughout the continent. 
Russian-backed gas pipelines such as Nord Stream II and a multi-line 
Turkish Stream seek to extend Russian market power in Europe and bypass 
Ukraine as an important transit country of Russian gas to Europe. If 
confirmed, I would continue to utilize diplomatic engagement and 
foreign assistance to support European goals to enhance security 
through diversification of energy type, source, and transit routes.

    Question 13. What position do you believe the U.S. should take on 
the Turkstream pipeline?

    Answer. Secretary Rex Tillerson stated in November 2017 that a 
multi-line Turkstream is ``unwise'' because it does not advance 
Europe's need for greater energy diversification. This is position is 
especially pronounced in the Balkans, where countries rely entirely or 
almost entirely on Russian gas imports.
    I understand that Russia supports a multiline Turkstream because it 
would enable Gazprom to reduce the volume of gas it would otherwise 
export to Europe through Ukraine. The first Turkish Stream pipeline, 
which I understand Turkey views as a national security priority, will 
have an annual capacity of 15.75 billion cubic meters (bcma) and will 
supply Istanbul. The second Turkish Stream pipeline would enable 
Gazprom to send a further 15.75 bcma to Europe without transiting 
Ukraine. Neither line would advance Turkey or Europe's energy 
diversification efforts but instead would lock-in their reliance on 
Russian gas volumes for years to come. Turkey and many of the Balkan 
countries are in challenging situations because Russia either is their 
chief or exclusive source of natural gas.
    I understand that the United States long has supported Europe and 
Turkey's energy diversification efforts as a key to strengthening their 
energy security and their broader national security. Russia has used 
Europe's dependence on its gas as a political weapon to undermine its 
security. The United States also recognizes that a country's reliance 
on a single source of energy supplies can make it vulnerable to 
disruptions and higher energy prices. The United States has a national 
security interest in seeing the Balkan countries and Turkey further 
develop their economies and pursue their European aspirations. If 
confirmed, I would support continued efforts in the Balkans and Turkey 
to advance energy diversification through projects like the Southern 
Gas Corridor, the Interconnector Greece-Bulgaria, the Interconnector 
Bulgaria-Serbia, and the Krk Island LNG import terminal in Croatia.

    Question 14. What will you do to support Europe's Third Energy 
Package, particularly in Eastern Europe?

    Answer. Implementation of the Third Energy Package is particularly 
important in Eastern Europe where many countries are dependent on 
Russian gas. Eastern European countries must play a central role in 
efforts to reduce Russia's energy leverage over the region by ensuring 
that all firms, including Russian firms, are compelled to adhere to 
market principles.
    If confirmed, I will continue to use diplomatic outreach to 
highlight the importance of an open and competitive energy market that 
allows for efficient production, transmission, and pricing while 
encouraging investment. This engagement should take place with the 
Energy Community, which includes the countries of the Western Balkans, 
Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine, as well as with the 28 member states of 
the EU, all of which have committed to implementing the Third Energy 
Package. Further, if confirmed, I will work closely with our European 
partners and allies to encourage and support implementation of market 
liberalization rules and laws designed to ensure the proper functioning 
of Europe's energy market and to guarantee that all companies play by 
free market rules. We will encourage the EU to quickly pass and 
implement a pending amendment to the gas directive of the Third Energy 
Package in order to fully apply EU law to both offshore and onshore 
pipelines entering the EU.

    Question 15. What technical assistance and energy development 
assistance would you recommend the U.S. provide our allies and 
strategic partners in Europe to improve Domestic Energy Resource 
Mobilization as a means of achieving greater energy security?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would support assistance that helps to 
improve European allies' and partners' domestic energy security and 
diversifies their energy sources, supplies, and routes to advance 
regional energy security. Domestic resource mobilization is country-
specific and depends in part on the presence of energy resources, 
governments' policy priorities, technical and human resource capacity, 
and other domestic factors. If confirmed, I would also encourage my 
team to view foreign assistance for the development of domestic 
resources in Europe in a regional context that acknowledges existing 
market linkages. Dependence on a single supplier for energy imports 
leaves countries vulnerable to external pressure from countries that 
use energy as a geopolitical weapon.

    Question 16. Do you feel that climate change represents a threat to 
life on Earth?

    Answer. I believe that climate change is real and is a threat to 
the planet. To address this global challenge requires concerted action 
on a global scale to advance sound science, accelerate technological 
and commercial innovation, and establish legal and regulatory systems 
that promote sustainable economic and environmental outcomes.

    Question 17. Do you believe it is appropriate and necessary for the 
U.S. Government to take some form of action to reduce U.S. carbon 
pollution?

    Answer. I fully support the administration's policy of a balanced 
approach to climate change mitigation, economic development, and energy 
security that takes into consideration the realities of the global 
energy mix. It is important to note that the U.S. has successfully 
delinked GHG emissions from economic growth. From 2005 to 2015, the 
U.S. economy grew by 15 percent while net GHGs decreased by more than 
11 percent. This is an American success story that, if confirmed, I 
will promote around the world.
    The National Security Strategy also recognized climate change and 
the importance of maintaining U.S. involvement and leadership. Page 22 
provides, ``Climate policies will continue to shape the global energy 
systems. The U.S. will continue to advance an approach that balances 
energy security, economic development, and environmental protection. 
The U.S. will remain a global leader in reducing traditional pollution, 
as well as greenhouse gases while expanding our economy.''
    Although climate change as an issue falls outside the Energy 
Bureau's remit, if confirmed, I will work to promote energy innovation, 
including in sustainable and clean energy and energy efficiency, and 
support for low greenhouse gas emissions energy systems.

    Question 18. Do you share the opinions of Sec. Mattis, Sec. Powell, 
and Sec. Hagel that climate change represents a serious national 
security threat to the U.S.?

    Answer. I defer to the National Security Council and leadership 
teams at the Departments State and Defense to comment on specific 
threats to the national security of the United States. However, I would 
also note that Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats, in his 
Statement for the Record on the Annual Threat Assessment stated that: 
``The impacts of the long-term trends towards a warming climate, more 
air pollution, biodiversity loss, and water scarcity are likely to fuel 
economic and social discontent--and possibly upheaval--through 2018.''

    Question 19. In response to Sen. Young's question to you at your 
hearing where he stated: ``my inference would be that you'd also agree 
that energy security is a necessary and important part of our national 
security. do you agree that the actions and priorities of the Bureau of 
Energy and Natural [sic] Resources can be optimized if they're carried 
out in support of a written strategic plan for the bureau?'' you 
answered: ``I think that I would just point out that the foundation 
would be the National Security Strategy which speaks to this very 
issue.''

   Are you aware that the National Security Strategy no longer 
        includes any references to climate change?

    Answer. Innovation and technological progress are the key to 
reducing the production of greenhouse gases and its impact on climate. 
It is important to note that the on page 22 the NSS provides, ``Climate 
policies will continue to shape the global energy systems. . The U.S. 
will continue to advance an approach that balances energy security, 
economic development, and environmental protection. The U.S. will 
remain a global leader in reducing traditional pollution, as well as 
greenhouse gases while expanding our economy.''Although, climate change 
falls outside the remit of the Energy Bureau, if confirmed, I will work 
to open markets and remove barriers to energy development and trade, 
providing access and a level-playing field for American companies so 
that they can pursue innovation and technological advances in the 
global energy market.

    Question 20. Given your commitment to provide Sen. Young with a 
written strategic plan for the Bureau, can you commit to me that the 
Bureau's strategic plan will account for the nexus climate change world 
energy production, the global security risks' associated with the 
effects of climate change?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the ENR strategy remains 
consistent with the administration's climate policy and the commitment 
in the National Security Strategy ``to advance an approach that 
balances energy security, economic development, and environmental 
protection'' and supports U.S. global leadership in ``reducing 
traditional pollution, as well as greenhouse gases, while expanding the 
U.S. economy.'' The Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental 
and Scientific Affairs (OES) leads the State Department on developing 
international climate policy and manages strategic bilateral and 
multilateral partnerships on climate change. I commit that, if 
confirmed, I will work closely with OES and partners across the 
interagency to ensure the work of the Energy Bureau supports the 
administration's climate policy and advances the U.S. position at the 
center of the global energy system as a leading producer, consumer, and 
innovator.

    Question 21. The President's FY19 Budget proposal's very deliberate 
elimination or reduction of funds for nearly all programs to address 
climate change is a clear demonstration of political hostility to U.S. 
action to address climate change and clean energy programs.

   Are you prepared to and willing to pushback against any political 
        agenda that is antithetical towards addressing climate change 
        or supporting the advancement of clean energy within the ENR 
        bureau's programs?

    Answer. Over the past 10 years, the United States has shown that it 
can reduce emissions while expanding the economy and promoting energy 
security. Since 2005, the United States' net greenhouse gas emissions 
have decreased 11.5 percent while the U.S. economy has grown 15 
percent, adjusted for inflation. A large portion of these reductions 
have come as a result of the adoption by the private sector of 
innovative energy technologies, especially in the energy sector.
    Collaborative U.S. public and private efforts over the past 10 
years have resulted in dramatic decreases in the cost of low-emissions 
technologies and fuels, including natural gas, solar, wind, energy 
storage, and energy efficiency. Natural gas prices have dropped to 
about a third of what they were in 2007 and the cost of utility-scale 
solar PV has dropped by more than 64 percent. These are all American 
success stories that, if confirmed, I would seek to promote around the 
world.
    If confirmed, I will work with other countries to continue 
advancing innovation in the development and deployment of a broad array 
of technologies that will ultimately enable the United States to 
achieve our climate and energy security goals.

    Question 22. Can you commit that you will work to maintain, or 
defend, the ENR bureau's core objectives as it relates to advancing an 
``all of the above'' approach to energy diplomacy?

    Answer. I believe that maintaining market access for U.S. energy 
products, technologies and services, and ensuring sustainable, 
transparent, and predictable international energy markets for our 
partners and ourselves is crucial to our security. I fully support the 
``all of the above'' approach and recognize that advocating for the 
full range of energy sources allows the United States to advance a 
diversified energy supply across multiple global contexts. If 
confirmed, I will seek to advance secure, stable, diversified, and 
modern global energy systems that uses a broad range of market-based 
energy solutions, irrespective of fuel type, and will pursue a range of 
governance solutions to advance U.S. interests, promote global energy 
security, and drive economic development.

    Question 23. Given the significance of climate diplomacy to the 
U.S.-China relationship, and the significant investment that China is 
making at home and abroad in renewable energy development, will you 
work to restore the climate cooperation dialogue between the U.S. and 
China--a former cornerstone of the U.S.-China relationship?

    Answer. My understanding is that the Bureau of Energy Resources 
(ENR) leads the Department's efforts to forge international energy 
policy, strengthen U.S. and global energy security, and respond to 
energy challenges from around the world that affect U.S. economic and 
national security. The Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental 
and Scientific Affairs (OES) leads the Department on developing 
international climate policy and manages strategic bilateral and 
multilateral climate change partnerships. Therefore, if confirmed, I 
would look to OES and the China team within the Bureau of East Asian 
and Pacific Affairs to consider the appropriate evolution of the U.S.-
China Climate Change Working Group, consistent with the 
administration's climate policy.
    With that said, given the U.S. position as a leader in the global 
energy system, I recognize the importance of maintaining a constructive 
and results-oriented relationship with China, as the U.S. will remain a 
critical force in advancing energy efficiency and clean energy efforts 
around the world as demand for energy increases.

    Question 24. How will you work to promote transparency and 
accountability in global energy development?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would pursue several avenues to promote 
transparency and accountability in global energy development. I would 
raise these issues in bilateral and multilateral energy security 
dialogues that ENR collaborates on with many of our global partners. I 
would also continue ENR's efforts to strengthen energy sector 
governance, access, and reliability in emerging economies to build the 
capacity of governments to develop and utilize their energy resources 
for long-term national benefit. I understand that ENR's programs 
support transparency and accountability objectives by: 1) building 
institutional and human resource capacity in emerging economies needed 
to ensure strong energy sector governance and transparency in the 
resource sectors; 2) providing governments and civil society with the 
tools needed to help support responsible development of domestic 
resources; and 3) supporting power market reforms and efforts to 
leverage regional electrical interconnections, to strengthen energy 
security, and advance regional cooperation.
    Moreover, I would work with USAID colleagues to ensure transparency 
and accountability are key pillars in our assistance, while also 
working together to seek new opportunities to underscore the need for 
transparency and accountability in our energy assistance work.

    Question 25. Are you committed to working with foreign governments 
to develop adequate accountability policies, and to fight corruption 
between foreign governments and U.S. and international energy 
developers operating around the world?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will work bilaterally with foreign 
governments and engage in multilateral fora to promote transparency 
abroad, improve energy resource governance, and reduce corruption. 
Further, I will continue ENR's efforts to work with countries around 
the world to improve hydrocarbon and mineral sector governance and 
oversight and pursue universal access to affordable and reliable energy 
supply through power sector reform and development.
    If confirmed I would also continue the Department of State and 
USAID's work with partner countries to prevent corruption before it 
starts and to strengthen detection and enforcement efforts, including 
encouraging countries to meet multilateral standards and political 
commitments.

    Question 26. As an adviser to the Secretary of State, will you 
advocate for the development of robust replacement rule governing the 
implement of Sec. 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and 
Consumer Protection Act (PL 111-203)?

    Answer. Section 1504 remains United States law. Writing, 
promulgating, and implementing regulation is the purview of the 
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). I understand that the 
Securities and Exchange Commission is in the process of promulgating a 
replacement rule to implement Section 1504. If confirmed, I will 
strongly advocate for robust transparency and governance programs 
globally, as it is a critical means to advance U.S. liberal democratic 
values, is foundational to free markets, and provides prerequisite 
conditions for U.S. private sector investment.

    Question 27. What role do democratic institutions and citizen-
responsive governments play in the development of foreign countries' 
energy resources?

    Answer. Strong democratic institutions, citizen engagement, and a 
free press are vitally important to the successful development of 
extractive resources. Revenue transparency of a country's energy and 
natural resources fosters government accountability by providing 
citizens a window into government budgets, helps citizens hold their 
leadership accountable, and facilitates public debate.

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Francis R. Fannon by Senator Edward J. Markey

    Question 1. China intends to spend more than 360 billion dollars 
through 2020 on renewable power sources like solar and wind. In 2017 
alone, China invested twice as much as the United States in clean 
energy, 86.5 billion dollars of which went to solar--more than half of 
the global market.
    Unfortunately, President Trumps' recent budget proposal will reduce 
our nation's ability to compete in global renewable energy markets. We 
know that government investment in renewable energy development and 
deployment is essential to the success of these industries.

   The Bureau of Energy and Natural Resources has long promoted an 
        ``all-of-the-above'' approach to energy diplomacy. What do you 
        think of that vision?

    Answer. I believe that maintaining market access for U.S. energy 
products, technologies and services, and ensuring sustainable, 
transparent, and predictable international energy markets for our 
partners and ourselves is crucial to our security. I fully support the 
``all of the above'' approach and recognize that advocating for the 
full range of energy sources allows the United States to advance a 
diversified energy supply across multiple global contexts. If 
confirmed, I will seek to advance secure, stable, diversified, and 
modern global energy systems that use a broad range of market-based 
energy solutions including advanced energy technologies, renewable 
energy, energy efficiency, and governance solutions to advance U.S. 
interests, global energy security, and economic development.

    Question 2. Do you think that renewable energy has an important 
role to play in energy diplomacy?

    Answer. I believe that it is important to promote energy supply 
diversity in terms of source and location. This necessarily includes 
renewable energy sources as means to support the energy security of the 
United States and our partners and allies while also advancing 
universal access to affordable and reliable energy. The Department of 
State's Bureau of Energy Resources (ENR) leads the Department's 
engagement with the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and 
actively participates in the organization's work program and 
development as a Council member. If confirmed, I will continue to 
advance ENR's work in coordination with USAID and other interagency 
partners to promote energy diversification, increased ac*cess to 
affordable and reliable energy, and to develop efficient and 
sustainable energy policies abroad through tech*nical assistance and 
public-private partnerships.

    Question 3. Can you commit to energy diplomacy that promotes 
renewable energy and energy efficiency? Can you pledge to applying 
time, budget, staffing, travel, and other resources at a level equal to 
those of other energy issues addressed at ENR?

    Answer. Advancing renewable energy and energy efficiency are key 
elements of an overall approach to promote diversified energy supply 
for the United States and our partners and allies. If confirmed, I will 
work to ensure that access to energy is diversified, in accordance with 
the National Security Strategy. I intend to devote appropriate staff 
resources, travel, and budget to support renewable energy and energy 
efficiency as elements of the overarching mission of advancing energy 
security and exports of U.S. energy resources, technologies and 
services.
    Improved energy efficiency represents an important component of 
energy security as it stabilizes grids, lessens dependence on unstable 
or nefarious foreign sources, increases energy access, and supports 
industrial growth. U.S. industry leads in energy efficiency. According 
to the 2017 U.S. Energy and Jobs Report, the U.S. energy efficiency 
market employs approximately 2.2 million people, including 290,000 
manufacturing jobs. If confirmed, I will advocate strongly for the 
adoption of U.S. business and finance models across the globe and open, 
transparent global energy markets in which U.S. companies can 
successfully compete.

    Question 4. Do you think Saudi Arabia has the solar resources to 
become a major producer of solar energy if it wanted to?

    Answer. Saudi Arabia has announced ambitious renewable energy 
targets as part of Saudi Vision 2030. The first test for Saudi Arabia's 
ability to reach these ambitious goals will come this year, as they 
have announced plans for $7 billion in renewable energy projects in 
2018, which will include 3.3 gigawatts of solar photovoltaic power as 
well as 800 megawatts of wind power.
    Saudi Arabia will have to balance the priorities laid out in their 
2030 vision between attracting private investment for renewable asset 
development against local content rules aimed at boosting their 
domestic economy. In this context, Saudi Arabia has potential to reach 
its domestic solar production goals with a balanced investment strategy 
and targeted technical exchange. If confirmed, I will work to ensure 
that U.S. energy-related engagement with Saudi Arabia reflects the 
administration's goals including the promotion of U.S. technological 
and financial solutions to reduce barriers for investment and ensuring 
energy security for the United States and our partners and allies.

                               __________
                               
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]


                              ----------                              

                              NOMINATIONS

                              ----------                              


                       TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 27, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in Room 
SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Todd Young, 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Young, Risch, Gardner, Barrasso, Merkley, 
Cardin, Shaheen, Murphy, Kaine, and Booker.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. TODD YOUNG, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM INDIANA

    Senator Young. Good afternoon. This hearing of the Senate 
Foreign Relations committee will come to order.
    I want to thank Senator Merkley for joining me to convene 
this hearing. I am grateful for our partnership on this and so 
many other issues.
    I also want to thank our distinguished nominees for being 
here.
    And I also want to thank Senator Cornyn, a good colleague 
from Texas, for being here.
    This afternoon, we will consider four nominees for 
positions that are important to this committee and to our 
country. We will divide today's hearings into two panels. The 
first panel will include two nominees.
    First is the Honorable Kevin Moley, who is nominated to be 
Assistant Secretary of State for International Organization 
Affairs. Ambassador Moley served as the representative of the 
United States to the Office of the United Nations and other 
international organizations in Geneva from 2001 to 2006. 
Ambassador Moley I would also like to note and thank you for 
your service in the United States Marine Corps to Iraq.
    The second nominee on the first panel is the Honorable 
Josephine Olsen, who is nominated to serve as the Director of 
the Peace Corps. Dr. Olsen has deep experience in the Peace 
Corps beginning in 1966 as a Peace Corps volunteer in Tunisia. 
She later served as Country Director, Regional Director, Chief 
of Staff, Deputy Director, and then Acting Director.
    I welcome both of you.
    Our second panel will also include two nominees.
    First will be Mr. Erik Bethel, who is nominated to be the 
United States Alternate Executive Director of the International 
Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Mr. Bethel has spent 
more than 2 decades in work related to finance and emerging 
markets. I would also note that Mr. Bethel is a proud fellow 
graduate of the United States Naval Academy.
    The second panel will also include Mr. Sean Cairncross, who 
is nominated to be the Chief Executive Officer of the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation, or MCC. Mr. Cairncross 
currently serves as a Deputy Assistant to the President and 
Senior Advisor to the Chief of Staff.
    With that, I would now like to call on Ranking Member 
Merkley for his opening remarks. Senator Merkley?

                STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM OREGON

    Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    I am pleased that we have these nominees here today for 
these four important international roles, and I hope that each 
of the individuals believes in the work of the bureau or agency 
that they have been nominated to lead.
    I have been disturbed by the Trump administration's 
proposed budgets which for 2 consecutive years have cut U.S. 
funding for diplomacy and development by over 30 percent. These 
organizations have a tremendous amount to offer.
    As leaders, you must know that stewardship and command 
responsibility are critically important. The professional men 
and women who serve in the bureaus and agencies are working 
very hard, advocating every day for Americans' interests and 
deserve excellent leadership that supports them, defends them, 
protects their work from political attacks.
    The roles that each of you have been nominated to serve 
represent some of the most important work our country 
undertakes in addressing pressing global challenges. Your 
leadership comes at a time when many have been disappointed in 
the de-emphasis of diplomacy and development under the current 
administration. When people around the world look at what truly 
makes America great, it is our belief that we can do well when 
others do well, where prosperity is complementary not a zero 
sum.
    As the United States emerged as a global leader in the 20th 
century, one of our proudest legacies was in helping to create 
the multilateral institutions that would provide a platform for 
nations to resolve conflict without resorting to bloodshed. The 
result has not always been perfect. It is sometimes hard to 
recognize what conflicts have been prevented. But much 
excellent work has been done and many conflicts have been 
prevented and much development has been promoted.
    The bureaus and agencies that our nominees are proposed to 
lead represent some of the many complementary ways that U.S. 
leadership engagement have evolved to meet the challenges we 
face in the 21st century.
    The Bureau of International Organization Affairs, or IO, is 
the nerve center for supporting U.S. engagement through all our 
United Nations missions and through other important 
multilateral forum.
    For more than 56 years, the Peace Corps has provided 
American citizens of all ages from all walks of life the 
opportunity serve abroad by providing their expertise to 
developing communities and sharing their experiences and 
passion with others when they return home.
    The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 
is also critical. As a nation, we are justly proud that after 
World War II, the Marshall Plan helped rebuild Europe into a 
community of nations that have been among our most stalwart 
allies in meeting the challenges we face today. But even before 
the war was won, we worked with our allies to develop 
international financial agreements that would complement our 
political and military efforts to achieve and maintain peace, 
including the IBRD, which was set up to encourage international 
trade necessary to rebuild and reintegrate global markets.
    And finally, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, or MCC, 
a relatively new initiative started under George W. Bush. It 
has had a distinct track record of success complementing our 
broader aid and development policies and programs, operating as 
a new model for providing foreign aid for economic development 
based on partnerships with recipient countries, designed to use 
American aid as a catalyst rather than a substitute for local 
based economic development.
    I look forward to hearing from each of the witnesses about 
how they will ensure that America continues to lead on 
diplomacy and development.
    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Merkley.
    In order to be respectful of my colleague's time, I would 
now invite Senator Cornyn to say any comments you would like, 
sir.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORNYN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    Senator Cornyn. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman and members 
of the committee. I appreciate your allowing me to be here 
today to recommend an extremely well qualified candidate, Sean 
Cairncross, to be the Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium 
Challenge Corporation. Sean, as you pointed out, Mr. Chairman, 
currently serves as the Deputy Assistant to the President of 
the United States, as well as a senior advisor to the 
President's Chief of Staff.
    Sean was my lawyer for an important period of time, and in 
that capacity I trusted him with my professional life, my 
reputation, and my future. And I do not know how much more I 
could say than that in terms of my confidence in him and I hope 
the confidence you will learn to have in him and his judgment.
    He was the Deputy Executive Director and General Counsel at 
the National Republican Senatorial committee for two cycles and 
represented me individually to make sure I complied with all 
applicable laws after he left that particular position.
    As I have hinted at, he is a man of great character and on 
numerous occasions has proven his ability to deftly respond to 
adversity and conflict.
    He is a man of many talents and wide-ranging interests. He 
is a lawyer by training, as I said, holding a J.D. from New 
York University, but he also has a master's Cambridge in 
international relations. And perhaps his most important 
qualification, he is a devoted husband and father of two 
wonderful children.
    I am sure his experience, his character, his training will 
prepare him well to serve in this new challenge. Obviously, the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation, as Senator Merkley said, has 
been an important part of our diplomatic efforts and support 
for developing countries. And I know this is a challenge that 
Sean looks forward to enthusiastically, and I have every 
confidence he will perform in a way that will make all of us 
proud and that will serve our country well.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Cornyn, for your 
presence here today. You are welcome to stay if you like, but 
if you need to depart, I certainly understand that.
    With that, Ambassador Moley, I would welcome your opening 
statement, 5 minutes or less, please.

    STATEMENT OF HON. KEVIN EDWARD MOLEY, OF ARIZONA, TO BE 
   ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION 
                            AFFAIRS

    Ambassador Moley. Chairman Young, Ranking Member, I am 
honored to be here today as the President's nominee to be 
Assistant Secretary of State for International Organizations.
    I would like to take this opportunity to thank my wife of 
48 years Dorothy. Unfortunately, she cannot be here, but I 
would not be here without her support, advice, patience, and 
above all, love.
    I would also like to thank two senior former career members 
of our Foreign Service who are here today in support of my 
nomination: Assistant Secretary of State Linda Thomas 
Greenfield, former Ambassador Greenfield to Liberia, and also 
former Director General of the Foreign Service; as well as 
Ambassador Jim Foley, who was our Ambassador to Haiti and later 
our Ambassador to Croatia and later still Deputy Commandant of 
the War College.
    I have been privileged and honored to have served my 
country in the administrations of three Presidents: during 
President Reagan's administration, in positions of increasing 
responsibility at HCFA, now CMS; in President Bush 41's 
administration, as Assistant Secretary of Management and Budget 
and later as the Deputy Secretary at the U.S. Department of 
Health and Human Services. In President Bush 43's 
administration, following 9/11, I was nominated to be U.S. 
Ambassador to the U.N. and other international organizations in 
Geneva. I was confirmed and served for 4 and a half years as 
Ambassador.
    Following my tenure as Ambassador, I served as Chairman of 
the Board of Project Concern International, a San Diego-based 
NGO doing development work in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. 
In that capacity, I traveled to Mexico, Guatemala, Tanzania, 
Zambia, and Ethiopia to observe and assist in PCI's mission. In 
Tanzania, Zambia, and Ethiopia, I met with our U.S. Ambassadors 
to solicit their views and advice.
    If confirmed, I would lead the Bureau of International 
Organization Affairs, which is the U.S. Government's primary 
interlocutory with the United Nations and other international 
agencies and organizations. The Bureau is charged with 
advancing the President's vision of robust multilateral 
engagement as a crucial tool in advancing U.S. national 
interests. U.S. multilateral engagement spans a wide range of 
global issues, including peace and security, nuclear 
proliferation, human rights, economic development, global 
health, and many more.
    Within the Department of State, the Bureau of International 
Organization Affairs is known as the ``bureau without 
borders,'' neither constrained by geography nor subject matter. 
The range of issues within its purview is extremely broad and 
to meet its challenges requires the expertise of not only our 
very able career foreign service officers and civil servants, 
but also the expertise from other bureaus of the State 
Department, other agencies of government, as well as outside 
experts. If confirmed, I would look forward to working 
collegially with all those in and out of government to further 
America's interests.
    My guiding principle, if confirmed to lead IO, will be 
America first but not alone. This means, for example, that at 
USUN New York, under the extraordinarily able leadership of 
Ambassador Haley and her team, we will, when necessary to 
protect our interests and those of allies, not hesitate to uses 
the veto, as we have done recently when Israel was most 
unfairly attacked.
    In Geneva and elsewhere, where we have U.S. missions to the 
U.N., and do not have the benefit of the veto, we must be 
extremely vigilant to protect America's interests. For example, 
in Geneva, we must protect America's most important product, 
intellectual property, in the deliberations of the World 
Intellectual Property Organization. Likewise, we must protect 
the integrity and fair use of the Internet at the International 
Telecommunications Union. There are over 20 international 
organizations in Geneva, in all of which we have important 
issues at stake.
    In Vienna, at our mission to UNVIE, we have vital interests 
before the IAEA and other agencies.
    In Rome, at our mission to the United Nations, we must 
increase our efforts to promote sustainable development.
    In Montreal, at our mission to ICAU, we will protect 
America's civil aviation interests.
    In Nairobi, we have interests in protecting the environment 
and reducing poverty.
    I have touched on only a few of the plethora of important 
issues which will confront the bureau without borders. I am 
sure you have interests which I have not mentioned. I look 
forward to your questions.
    In summary, Senators, I am proud to have served our nation 
as an Assistant Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and United States 
Ambassador. However, the title of which I am most proud I 
earned over 50 years ago on the Parade Deck at Parris Island, 
South Carolina, United States Marine. Semper Fi.
    Thank you.
    [Ambassador Moley's prepared statement follows:]


             Prepared Statement of Hon. Kevin Edward Moley

    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley: I am honored to be here 
today as the President's nominee to be Assistant Secretary of State for 
International Organizations. I would like to take this opportunity to 
thank my wife of 48 years, Dorothy. I wouldn't be here without her 
support, advice, patience, and above all, love.
    I've been privileged and honored to have served my country in the 
administrations of three Presidents, during President Reagan's 
administration, in positions of increasing responsibility at HCFA, now 
CMS, in President Bush 41's administration as Assistant Secretary of 
Management and Budget and later as the Deputy Secretary of the U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services. In President Bush 43's 
administration, following 9/11, I was nominated to be U.S. Ambassador 
to the U.N. and other International Organizations, in Geneva. I was 
confirmed and served for four-and-a-half years as Ambassador.
    Following my tenure as Ambassador, I served as Chairman of the 
Board of Project Concern International (PCI Global.org), a San Diego 
based NGO, doing development work in Latin America, Asia, and Africa. 
In that capacity I traveled to Mexico, Guatemala, Tanzania, Zambia, and 
Ethiopia to observe and assist in PCI's mission. In Tanzania, Zambia, 
and Ethiopia I met with our U.S. Ambassadors to solicit their views and 
advice.
    If confirmed, I would lead the Bureau of International Organization 
Affairs (IO), which is the U.S. Government's primary interlocutor with 
the United Nations and other international agencies and organizations. 
The Bureau is charged with advancing the President's vision of robust 
multilateral engagement as a crucial tool in advancing U.S. national 
interests. U.S. multilateral engagement spans a wide range of global 
issues, including peace and security, nuclear proliferation, human 
rights, economic development, global health, and many more.
    Within the Department of State, the Bureau of International 
Organizations Affairs (IO) is known as the ``Bureau without Borders,'' 
neither constrained by geography nor subject matter. The range of 
issues within its purview is extremely broad and to meet its challenges 
requires the expertise of not only our very able career Foreign Service 
Officers, and Civil Servants, but also the expertise from other Bureaus 
of the State Department and other agencies of government, as well as 
outside experts. If confirmed, I would look forward to working 
collegially with all those in, and out, of government to further 
America's interests.
    My guiding principle, if confirmed to lead IO, will be ``America 
First, but not alone.'' This means, for example, that at USUN New York, 
under the extraordinarily able leadership of Ambassador Haley and her 
team, we will, when necessary to protect our interests, and those of 
allies, not hesitate to use the veto, as we have done recently, when 
Israel was most unfairly attacked. In Geneva and elsewhere, where we 
have U.S. Missions to the U.N., and do not have the benefit of the 
veto, we must be extremely vigilant to protect America's interests. For 
example, in Geneva, we must protect America's most important product, 
intellectual property, in the deliberations of the World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO). Likewise, we must protect the integrity 
and fair use of the internet at the International Telecommunications 
Union (ITU). There are over 20 international organizations in Geneva, 
in all of which we have important issues at stake. In Vienna, at our 
Mission to UNVIE, we have vital interests before the IAEA, and other 
agencies. In Rome, at our Mission to the United Nations, we must 
increase our efforts to promote sustainable development. As the old 
adage goes, ``It's far better to teach a person to fish than to give 
them a fish.'' In Montreal, at our Mission to ICAU, we will protect 
America's civil aviation interests. In Nairobi, we have interests in 
protecting the environment and reducing poverty.
    I have touched on only a few of the plethora of important issues 
which will confront the ``Bureau without Borders.'' I am sure you have 
interests which I have not mentioned. I look forward to your questions.
    Senators, in summary, I am proud to have served our nation as an 
Assistant Secretary, Deputy Secretary, and as a United States 
Ambassador; however, the title of which I am most proud, is the title I 
earned over 50 years ago on the Parade Deck at Parris Island, South 
Carolina: United States Marine.
    Thank you.


    Senator Young. Nice close, Mr. Ambassador.
    Dr. Olsen?

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPHINE OLSEN, OF MARYLAND, NOMINATED TO BE 
                  DIRECTOR OF THE PEACE CORPS

    Dr. Olsen. Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, and 
other distinguished members of the committee, including Senator 
Cardin from my home State of Maryland, it is an honor to appear 
before you today as the President's nominee to lead the Peace 
Corps. I am grateful to President Trump for his trust and 
confidence. I am also grateful to all those who helped me 
prepare for today.
    I also want to recognize my family members who are here 
today and watching live in Portland, Oregon and in Salt Lake 
City, Utah.
    I vividly remember standing in a small classroom before 40 
students on my first day as a Peace Corps volunteer in Tunisia. 
I was 22 years old, nervous, and had no idea what my first 
words would be. In Arabic, French, or English. I stepped 
forward, said my name, and asked for theirs. Together, with 
that day's lesson, my 2 years as a Peace Corps volunteer began.
    I discovered who I was in the face of challenges and 
circumstances that I had never known. I learned to listen to, 
respond, and honor people who were different than me. I learned 
about a way of life in North Africa that was unlike mine in 
Salt Lake City, Utah. I learned that regardless of differences, 
there was so much that connected us. I also learned what it 
meant to serve my country, to be part of something far, far 
greater than myself.
    From that day in Tunisia, service and the Peace Corps have 
remained central themes of my life. Since taking my oath as a 
volunteer, I have been passionately dedicated to lifting up the 
mission and goals of the agency.
    My Peace Corps journey continued when I became a country 
director, then regional director, later chief of staff, deputy 
director, and subsequently acting director. Each of these 
vantage points have reaffirmed my deep belief in the power of 
the Peace Corps to change lives across borders and here at 
home.
    Time and again, I have had the honor of seeing Americans 
engaging with communities in countless countries throughout the 
world. I have also seen the remarkable way that returned Peace 
Corps volunteers teach, inspire, and strengthen communities 
here at home.
    Becoming a Peace Corps volunteer ignites a passion for 
service that illuminates incredible possibility around the 
world and throughout the United States. This passion for 
service glows in Memphis, Tennessee where return Peace Corps 
volunteer Jay Sieleman brought back to life the Blues 
Foundation, which is now the largest blues organization in the 
world. Jay, who after serving as a legal advisor in the Peace 
Corps in the Solomon Islands, understood the importance of 
helping preserve American history and the role that communities 
play. This is why he both raised funds globally to build the 
Blues Hall of Fame in Memphis and simultaneously developed 
initiatives to extend community outreach.
    This passion also glows in the more than 7,000 volunteers 
who are currently serving in more than 60 countries. This 
passion also glows in the more than 230,000 returned Peace 
Corps volunteers, the majority of whom live here in the United 
States.
    Returned Peace Corps volunteers bring home unique language, 
cultural, and diplomatic skills. They return with deep 
knowledge about the countries where they served and new 
perspectives about the ways in which our country engages with 
the world. Today, they are running Fortune 500 companies, 
leading NASA missions on the International Space Station, 
helping Alaska Native villages with food security, and teaching 
our nation's next generation of leaders at schools and 
universities across this country.
    In addition to my Peace Corps service, my work at the 
University of Maryland these past 8 years has further prepared 
me to lead the Peace Corps, if confirmed. As a professor, I 
guided the university's global health education programs and 
saw the importance of cross-community collaboration and 
capacity building for sustainable impact.
    Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, many of you have 
asked about my vision for Peace Corps within its mission and 
three goals.
    First, if confirmed, I will ensure that the Peace Corps 
remains the world's preeminent volunteer agency that offers all 
Americans the opportunity to serve their country regardless of 
age, where they live, or walk of life.
    Second, I will conduct a full country portfolio review to 
both make certain that Peace Corps is sending volunteers to 
interested countries where they are most needed, where they 
stand poised to achieve the greatest impact, and where they 
deliver the best return on investment for American taxpayers.
    Third, I will ensure that the Peace Corps recruit the most 
resilient volunteers and that while serving, the agency's top 
priorities will always remain keeping them safe, healthy, and 
productive in doing their jobs. This includes, Senators, 
continuing to reduce risks for volunteers and respond 
effectively and compassionately to those who become victims of 
crime, including sexual assault. Volunteers can count on the 
Peace Corps being there for them every step of the way as the 
agency continues to advance its mission, which has changed 
countless lives in its 57 years and I have no doubt countless 
more in the years to come.
    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, and other 
distinguished members of the committee, again thank you for the 
opportunity to appear before you today. Thank you for your 
support for the Peace Corps and its incredible volunteers. I 
look forward to your questions.
    [Dr. Olsen's prepared statement follows:]


          Prepared Statement of Dr. Josephine (Jody) K. Olsen

    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, and other distinguished 
members of the committee; it is an honor and a privilege to appear 
before you today as the President's nominee to lead the Peace Corps.
    I am grateful to President Trump for his trust and confidence. I am 
also grateful to all those who helped me prepare for today. I also want 
to recognize my daughter, son-in-law, and brother, who are here, and 
family who are watching live.
    I vividly remember standing in a classroom before 40 students at 
the Lycee de Garcon de Sousse on my first day as a Peace Corps 
Volunteer in Tunisia. I was 22 years old, nervous, and had no idea what 
my first words would be. In Arabic, French or English.
    I stepped forward, said my name, and asked for theirs. Together, 
with that day's lesson, my two years as a Peace Corps Volunteer had 
begun. I discovered who I was in the face of challenges and 
circumstances that I had never known. I learned to listen to, respect, 
and honor people who were different than me. I learned about a way of 
life in North Africa that was unlike mine in Salt Lake City, Utah.
    I learned that regardless of differences, there was so much that 
connected us. I also learned what it meant to serve my country--to be 
part of something far, far greater than myself. From that day in 
Tunisia, service has remained a central theme in my life. So too has 
the Peace Corps.
    Since taking my oath as a Volunteer, I have been passionately 
dedicated to lifting up the mission and goals of the agency. My Peace 
Corps journey continued when I became a country director; then regional 
director; and later, Chief of Staff; Deputy Director; and subsequently, 
Acting Director. Each of these vantage points has reaffirmed my deep 
belief in the power of the Peace Corps to change lives across borders 
and here at home.
    Time and again, I have had the honor of seeing Americans engaging 
with communities in Togo, Peru, Armenia, and countless other countries. 
And I have seen the remarkable ways that Returned Peace Corps 
Volunteers teach, inspire, and strengthen communities back home in the 
United States.
    Becoming a Peace Corps Volunteer ignites a passion for service that 
illuminates incredible possibility around the world and throughout the 
United States.
    This passion for service glows in Memphis, Tennessee, where 
Returned Peace Corps Volunteer Jay Sieleman brought back to life the 
Blues Foundation, which is now the largest and most renowned blues 
organization in the world. Jay, who after serving as a legal advisor in 
the Peace Corps in the Solomon Islands, understood the importance of 
helping preserve American history and the role communities play. This 
is why he both raised funds globally to build the Blues Hall of Fame in 
Memphis and simultaneously developed initiatives to extend community 
outreach, provide medical and health support to musicians, and grant 
educational and scholarship opportunities for the next generation of 
blues players.
    As I speak, this passion glows in the more than 7,000 Volunteers 
who are currently serving in more than 60 countries. This passion also 
glows in the more than 230,000 Returned Peace Corps Volunteers all 
across the United States. Returned Peace Corps Volunteers bring home 
unique language, cultural and diplomatic skills. They return with deep 
knowledge about the countries where they served, and new perspectives 
about the ways in which our country engages with the world. They are 
true global citizens contributing to our global economy, our country, 
and the urban and rural communities where they live and work all across 
the United States.
    Today, they are running Fortune 500 companies, leading NASA 
missions on the International Space Station, helping Alaska Native 
villages with food security, and teaching our nation's next generation 
of leaders at schools and universities across our country.
    In addition to my Peace Corps service, my work at the University of 
Maryland, has further prepared me to lead the Peace Corps if confirmed. 
I have guided the University's global health education programs. In the 
process of working with students and health care professionals across 
the globe, I have seen the importance of cross-community collaboration 
and capacity building for sustainable impact.
    Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, many of you have asked 
about my vision for the Peace Corps within its mission and three goals:

   First, if confirmed, I will ensure that the Peace Corps remains the 
        world's preeminent volunteer agency that offers ALL Americans 
        the opportunity to serve their country. Regardless of their 
        age, where they live, or their walk of life.
   Second, I will conduct a full country portfolio review to both make 
        certain that Peace Corps is sending volunteers to interested 
        countries where they are most needed, where they stand poised 
        to achieve greatest impact, and where they deliver the best 
        return on investment for American taxpayers.
   Third, I will ensure that the Peace Corps recruit the most 
        resilient Volunteers and that while serving, the agency's top 
        priorities will always remain keeping them safe, healthy, and 
        productive in doing their jobs. This includes, Senators, 
        continuing to reduce risks for Volunteers and respond 
        effectively and compassionately to those who become victims of 
        crime, including sexual assault.

    In those tragic instances, Volunteers can count on the Peace Corps 
being there for them every step of the way. I see no higher priority 
for the Peace Corps than the safety and security of our Volunteers as 
the agency continues to advance its mission, which has changed 
countless lives in its 57 years--and, I have no doubt, countless more 
in the years to come.
    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, and other distinguished 
members of the committee; again, thank you for the opportunity to 
appear before you today.
    Thank you for your support of the Peace Corps and its incredible 
Volunteers.
    I look forward to your questions.


    Senator Young. Thank you, Doctor.
    Ambassador Moley, as you know, fentanyl is a synthetic 
opioid that is significantly more potent than heroin. Fentanyl 
and related substances are linked to the horrible and ongoing 
opioid epidemic in this country and have become increasingly 
available. This is a terrible problem around the country I know 
but most especially, I would say, in certain States like my 
home State of Indiana.
    According to the Congressional Research Service, quote, 
clandestine-produced fentanyl, as well as most illicit fentanyl 
precursor chemicals and fentanyl analogs, are primarily sourced 
from China and smuggled into the United States through Mexico, 
Canada, or other direct mail. Unquote. In addition, the DEA 
suspects Mexican labs may use precursor chemicals smuggled over 
the southwestern border to produce fentanyl.
    Mr. Moley, as the Assistant Secretary of State for 
International Organization Affairs, you would develop and 
implement U.S. policy as it relates to international 
organizations. If confirmed, do you commit to working closely 
with me and my office to ensure our nation has the optimal 
strategy for using our voice, our vote, and our influence in 
international organizations to address the illicit 
international production and trafficking of fentanyl and 
related substances?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, thank you for your question. And 
yes, I certainly will make that commitment to work with you and 
your staff to combat fentanyl trafficking.
    Specifically, the Universal Postal Union based in Bern, 
Switzerland, which is in the purview of our U.N. mission to 
Geneva and, quite frankly, when I served there was something of 
an afterthought--it is now front and center in terms of our 
ability to combat the opioid crisis, exploiting vulnerabilities 
in U.S. and international mail. In fact, Senators Portman and 
Carper released a report on January 24th on this very subject, 
and there is much that we can do in increasing our ability to 
intercept that traffic using AEDs, advanced electronic data, 
i.e., bar codes with more information about the sender, which 
is often not in place when mail comes into the United States 
carrying, trafficking fentanyl.
    So I absolutely make that commitment to work with you and 
your staff and others. I know others on this committee are in 
States that also have extreme opioid crises.
    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. I know the people 
of Indiana appreciate that commitment as well.
    Mr. Moley, as you know, Ambassador Haley has prioritized 
U.N. peacekeeping reform. What do you see as the top priority 
when it comes to U.N. peacekeeping reform?
    Ambassador Moley. U.N. peacekeeping reform, Senator, is a 
very important priority for Ambassador Haley and all of us who, 
if confirmed, would be working in IO. There are over 100,000 
U.N. peacekeepers, at an expense of $8 billion, in 15 missions 
currently. There have been issues in respect to sexual 
exploitation and abuse. On the other hand, there is a recent 
GAO report that suggests that it is much less expensive for 
U.N. peacekeepers to be used in some of these areas than 
obviously would be to use U.S. armed forces.
    So it is very important that we make sure that Secretary-
General Guterres, who is making reform efforts in this area, 
has the tools necessary to ensure that the units that are 
deployed are appropriate for the cause they are serving and are 
well trained and do not subject the indigenous population to 
sexual abuse and exploitation.
    Senator Young. Well, I appreciate your interest in and 
knowledge of this issue, as I know the ranking member does.
    On September 7th, Senator Merkley and I sent a letter to 
the General Accountability Office requesting a formal review of 
all ongoing United Nations peacekeeping operations, and that 
review is underway and is about one-third complete. When that 
review is complete, if confirmed, do you commit to reviewing it 
and working with my office and other members of this committee 
to implement any prudent recommendations for U.N. peacekeeping?
    Ambassador Moley. Absolutely, Senator. If confirmed, I 
would look forward to working with you and your staff on this 
issue because U.N. peacekeepers are at the heart of the U.N.'s 
credibility, and if we lose credibility for those peacekeepers, 
then we have little further to go on. And it is absolutely 
essential. And I believe Secretary-General Guterres shares that 
view as well.
    Senator Young. Dr. Olsen, many who are observing these 
hearings may not be familiar with the Peace Corps. Based on 
your deep experience in the Peace Corps, as well as your 
preparation for this hearing, perhaps in your own words you can 
share for those who are watching what you see as the 
fundamental mission or purpose of the Peace Corps.
    Dr. Olsen. Thank you very much, Senator, for that question.
    Peace Corps' mission is world peace and friendship and 
three goals: to assist in technical assistance with 
counterparts in countries that invite volunteers to serve; 
second, to share who they are as Americans; and third, to bring 
that experience back home sharing with Americans as returned 
volunteers continue to serve. Thus, the core purpose of Peace 
Corps or the core mission and activities of Peace Corps is to 
recruit from all Americans, to ensure they have good situations 
in which to serve, and to keep them safe, secure, and healthy 
while serving.
    Senator Young. So how are we doing? How is the Peace Corps 
doing in fulfilling that important mission? And what are some 
areas you believe may require increased attention? And if you 
could highlight how you envision addressing any of these areas 
that may require increased attention, that would be most 
helpful.
    Dr. Olsen. Thank you, Senator.
    Peace Corps is doing very well. I obviously have biases. 
Peace Corps' recruitment is at--about 22,000 people apply a 
year, the highest ever, with 7,300 volunteers in the field in 
over 60 countries, as I said before. The welcome to Peace Corps 
around the world is very strong and the collaboration with 
countries is very strong. And the work that returned Peace 
Corps volunteers do here in the United States affects 
communities, education institutions throughout the United 
States.
    Peace Corps needs to continue to focus on strong 
programming, strong health support, and risk reduction for 
crime and sexual assault. Peace Corps has come a long way in 
the last few years, particularly the last 2 or 3 years, in 
setting up systems that can greatly reduce the risk of crime 
and sexual assault. If confirmed, I will focus strongly on 
strong programming, strong health support, strong risk 
reduction, safety and security, and honoring those volunteers 
who have returned back to this country to serve here.
    Senator Young. Thank you.
    With that, I will turn to the ranking member, Senator 
Merkley.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you both for your testimony and for 
your willingness to consider leading these organizations.
    Ms. Olsen, I am delighted to know that you have a son and 
his family in Oregon and that you visit it regularly. So 
continue to visit often. [Laughter.]
    Senator Merkley. And you bring an extensive background in 
the Peace Corps to consideration of this mission of leadership.
    You mentioned in your testimony that there is no higher 
priority for the Peace Corps than the safety and security of 
our volunteers as the agency continues to advance its mission. 
It is in fact a setting that Peace Corps volunteers put 
themselves into that is not inherently safe. It does not have 
many of the layers of protection that we might have in our 
lives here in the United States, friends nearby, all forms of 
communication, transportation, and so forth. And so there is 
inherent risk. But obviously you hope to minimize that.
    And so I thought I would just ask, as one looks back on 
some of the cases of the past that received some considerable 
attention, the Kate Puzey case, which I think happened when you 
were an Acting Director, and Nick Castle. We passed the Nick 
Castle Act. Well, it recently passed the Senate Foreign 
Relations committee. He had died in China as a Peace Corps 
volunteer without adequate medical care. As you look back on 
some of these things, how does it shape the sense of where you 
want to go in trying to enhance, under difficult conditions, 
the health and welfare of the volunteers?
    Dr. Olsen. Thank you, Senator.
    And my grandchildren are waving at you right now from their 
classroom in Portland, Oregon.
    I still grieve the murder of Kate Puzey, and I remain 
heartbroken. And in honor of her life and her light as a Peace 
Corps volunteer in Benin, I commit to continue to strengthen 
safety and security, privacy support through training, through 
safety and security officers, through regional officers to 
ensure that risk reduction can continue to be as strong as 
absolutely possible.
    I also note with the passing of Mr. Castle, who was a 
volunteer in China and the legislation that is I know now 
before you, any legislation that strengthens the commitment of 
Peace Corps in safety and security and in health is critical 
for the agency. And the agency is grateful that the Senate 
staff worked with the Peace Corps in shaping and building that 
very important piece of legislation.
    I personally, if confirmed, will continue to directly work 
with the Office of Victim Advocacy and the Office of Sexual 
Assault Risk Reduction and Response, the two offices at Peace 
Corps that are involved in training all Peace Corps staff and 
all Peace Corps volunteers in sexual assault, risk reduction, 
and response and that that continued in-service training and 
support stay strong, that Peace Corps continue to be a best 
practices agency that works strongly with other agencies and 
organizations.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you very much. I appreciate that.
    And, Ambassador Moley, I wanted to give you a chance just 
to state a few things on the record. You are an investor with a 
broad portfolio that touches on many market sectors that could 
be influenced by U.S. policy at the U.N.. My understanding is 
that you have agreed to, if confirmed, sell those holdings that 
raise conflict of interest concerns. Is that correct?
    Ambassador Moley. Yes, I have, Senator. I have signed an 
ethics agreement that would require me to divest those 
interests.
    Senator Merkley. Great. Thank you.
    In 2004, you wrote a letter to the editor of the 
International Herald Tribune'' that defended the Bush 
administration's practices in the detention of enemy combatants 
in Guantanamo. There has been a lot of debate in the many 
years, 14 years, since and we learned a lot. Is there any ways 
in which your thoughts in regard to detention have evolved?
    Ambassador Moley. Well, they have evolved to the extent, 
Senator, that I still believe that Lord Steyn was repudiated by 
the very fact that he mentioned that we were conducting the 
detentions at Guantanamo illegally against both U.S. law, 
international law, and the Geneva Conventions. As we now know, 
of course, in the case of Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, decided June 
29th, 2006, of course, we subjected our detention principles in 
Guantanamo to our courts, and we are under now a new legal 
framework than we were at the time. Obviously, my letter was 
not written without the assistance and clearance of legal 
counsel from the State Department, from the Justice Department, 
from the Defense Department, and from the State Department. But 
as I said, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld I think clearly repudiates Lord 
Steyn's principal contention that we were operating outside the 
law.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you. I will note that in contesting 
his arguments you argued that his concern that use of force was 
presented against the prisoners--you contested that and said we 
are operating completely on humane treatment of detainees. We 
did have significant additional information. Any changes in 
your thoughts in that regard?
    Ambassador Moley. To the extent that I was wrong at the 
time, it was by virtue with the assurances I had received from 
the Department of the Navy.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you very much.
    The Trump administration has cut funding to the United 
Nations Population Fund which provides critical maternal and 
family planning support to women and children in vulnerable 
situations. I saw them at work in the refugee camps in 
Bangladesh providing essential aid as hundreds of thousands of 
refugees were pouring in.
    If confirmed, would you consider advocating to restore this 
critical funding?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, I was not present, of course, 
when those deliberations and decisions were being made, and I 
certainly look into that issue. I know that there are 
differences of opinion in regard to that issue. In fact, my 
predecessor, Sheba Crocker, Assistant Secretary of State at the 
time, has said that the rationale for cutting those funds is 
incorrect. And I will be taking into consideration both her 
comments, quite frankly, and also those of those people who 
made the decision at the time. So it is an issue of importance 
to many of you on the committee, and I will in fact look into 
it.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    Ambassador Moley. If confirmed.
    Senator Young. I would note that we are likely to go to 
multiple rounds here by members' requests, so at least two 
rounds, again 7 minutes for questions.
    Senator Gardner?
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Does that mean I 
get both rounds now or do I have to wait?
    Senator Young. You have got to wait. We want to see how you 
do on this first round. [Laughter.]
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks to both of the nominees for your service. Thanks for 
being here today. I am grateful for your support.
    Dr. Olsen, I will start with you. Thank you very much for 
the book that you presented in my office, Pauline Berkey I 
believe. For the information of members of the committee, could 
you explain how Colorado State is really responsible for the 
Peace Corps? [Laughter.]
    Dr. Olsen. I would be delighted to.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, which is a true statement. And 
I also want to brag up Colorado, because if you look at per 
capita, Boulder, Colorado, I think is the number three biggest 
contributor to the Peace Corps.
    Dr. Olsen. It is.
    Senator Gardner. Fort Collins, Colorado is number five to 
the Peace Corps. We are very proud of that fact. So thank you 
for your service.
    Ambassador Moley, in the 114th Congress, this body passed 
legislation that would require the State Department to develop 
a U.S. strategy to endorse and obtain observer status for 
Taiwan in appropriate international organizations, including 
Interpol, the World Health Organization, the International 
Civil Aviation Organization, and others.
    Could you explain to me efforts that you would pursue to 
ensure full U.S. support for Taiwan's meaningful participation 
in international organizations?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, we will pursue Taiwan's 
participation in any and all international fora, which does not 
have a requirement for participation of statehood, and we will 
make a very strong effort to get them involved. They are an 
important participant in many ways and would add to the 
international debate in many, many of the fora before the 
United Nations. If statehood is not required for membership, 
there is no reason why Taiwan should not be admitted.
    Senator Gardner. I think Taiwan can play a critical role in 
global leadership, whether it is issues relating to disease 
control, eradication, crime organizations and eradication, and 
participation in a number of organizations involved in relief 
efforts, criminal efforts that we have got to make sure that 
they have their full participation. Thank you for that.
    And I hope that you will give me this commitment--I think 
you just did--that you will raise at the highest levels with 
international counterparts, including with representatives from 
the People's Republic of China, that commitment.
    Ambassador Moley. You have my full commitment, Senator.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you very much, Ambassador.
    In September 2017, I authored letters to 21 nations asking 
them to close their diplomatic facilities in Pyongyang and to 
support expelling North Korea from the United Nations as part 
of the administration's maximum pressure campaign.
    Would you support efforts to expel North Korea from the 
United Nations and other international organizations?
    Ambassador Moley. I will support the administration's 
position in respect to increasing leverage at every level on 
DPRK.
    Senator Gardner. I believe the administration has done a 
pressure campaign as well on many of these embassies and 
countries in Pyongyang. Is that correct?
    Ambassador Moley. You will have my support.
    Senator Gardner. You will continue that. Thank you.
    Mr. Chairman, I yield my time.
    Senator Young. Thank you.
    Senator Gardner. Actually, Mr. Chairman, do you mind? I got 
really excited about yielding, but I do have a couple more 
questions I want to get to, if you do not mind. Reclaiming my 
time.
    Senator Young. You mean----
    Senator Gardner. In round two. Thank you.
    Senator Young. Go ahead.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you.
    Ambassador Moley, continuing with you along this line of 
questioning, could you share with me your strategy to combat 
the anti-Israel bias at the United Nations and other 
international organizations?
    Ambassador Moley. Well, it is particularly pervasive, 
Senator, as you know, at the Human Rights Council, which is 
meeting as we speak in Geneva. Our Acting Assistant Secretary, 
Ambassador Molly Phee, is there as we speak, and I know she 
will make every effort--and I certainly would, if confirmed--to 
push back against anti-Israel bias as reflected in item 7 of 
the Human Rights Council's deliberations.
    Senator Gardner. Would you support withdrawal of the United 
States' participation in the Human Rights Council if they 
continue this anti-Israel bias?
    Ambassador Moley. As you may know, we come up for our term 
limit in 2019, and I will, if confirmed, be participating in 
those deliberations to make a determination as to what is in 
our best interest to seek another term or not. Sometimes it is 
more appropriate to be inside the tent than outside the tent, 
but there are certainly arguments to be made on both sides of 
that.
    Senator Gardner. And thank you.
    And last question. Could you outline a strategy that will 
help ensure and prevent the Palestinian Authority from 
obtaining international recognition at the United Nations and 
other international organizations?
    Ambassador Moley. At this time, Senator, we are not aware 
of any effort for them to gain that recognition, but we will 
fight it at every turn, should it arise. As you know, we left 
UNESCO as a consequence of them being admitted to statehood in 
that organization.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Ambassador.
    And I have 2 minutes remaining on my time. Before I yield 
it back, Dr. Olsen, if you would like to pontificate on 
Colorado State University, that is fine with me. If not, I will 
yield back my time.
    Dr. Olsen. I will just say two faculty in 1960 wrote what 
became the outline of Peace Corps, and in fact, they were 
invited back to Washington, DC by Sargent Shriver in March of 
1961 to help guide the initial formation of Peace Corps.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you.
    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Gardner.
    Senator Shaheen?
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    Thank you both for your willingness to be nominated for 
these very important posts.
    Ambassador Moley, as you may be aware, last month U.S.-
supported forces in Syria captured two ISIS fighters who were 
believed to be members of the group known as the Beatles. These 
two captured men are alleged to have been intimately involved 
in the imprisonment, torture, and murder of one of my former 
constituents, James Foley. Mr. Foley's family has publicly 
requested that President Trump take steps to ensure that these 
two men are held responsible for their crimes, meaning that 
they be tried either in the United States or in some sort of an 
international arena.
    If confirmed, do you commit to pursuing options to bring 
them to justice, including through international justice 
mechanisms?
    Ambassador Moley. If confirmed, Senator, I do so commit. 
Every effort should be made to bring these people to justice.
    Senator Shaheen. And do you have any thoughts about where 
the most appropriate place would be to do that?
    Ambassador Moley. Quite frankly, Senator, I do not. I know 
what I have read in the public media, but I am not, as yet, 
confirmed and have not been read in on that issue. But I will 
commit to making every effort to bring them to justice and will 
work with you in that regard.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate 
that and I know that the Foley family will as well.
    I want to follow up a little bit on Senator Merkley's 
question about UNFPA because in March of 2017, the Trump 
administration invoked the Kemp-Kasten amendment to withhold 
U.S. funding for the United Nations Population Fund. Now, that 
amendment states that no U.S. funds may be made available to 
any organization or program which, as determined by the 
President of the United States, supports or participates in the 
management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary 
sterilization.
    Ambassador Moley, are you aware or have you heard from 
anybody in the administration any information that would 
suggest that UNFP has been engaged in this prohibited behavior?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, only to the extent that in 
briefing materials I have seen the allegation that funding has 
gone to a Chinese health agency which has, in fact, implicitly 
or explicitly coerced abortion.
    Having said that, I recognize there are conflicting 
opinions, and as I mentioned, my predecessor as recently as 
April wrote an article--Sheba Crocker--to the extent that she 
does not believe that there is proof of that allegation. I am 
intending to reach out to former Assistant Secretary of State 
Crocker to hear her rationale for why she does not believe that 
is the case. Having said that, if confirmed, of course, I will 
then have information about the deliberation and the 
determination that was made by the President in this regard.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, I very much appreciate your 
following up on that. I am not aware nor have I heard from 
anyone in the administration that UNFPA is engaged in any 
behavior that would mean that it would be prohibited from 
gaining funds. So I think your willingness to follow up is very 
important, and I hope you will share with this committee what 
you learn with that regard and that we will take action if your 
finding is that they should not be prohibited from receiving 
funds because, as Senator Merkley pointed out, they do 
tremendous and very important work for women and children in so 
many parts of this world. And for us to dramatically reduce 
funding there has had serious consequences for women and 
families.
    I also want to follow up on your comments about when it is 
appropriate to withdraw from international organizations. I 
appreciate that international organizations do not always do 
what we would like them to do, and that sometimes presents 
foreign policy challenges. But the fact is it seems to me that 
often when we withdraw, we reduce our ability to influence what 
those organizations do rather than increase it.
    So under what circumstances would you advise us withdrawing 
from an international organization?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, it would be determined by the 
circumstances at the time. If confirmed, I can assure you that 
I would make sure that all sides of the issue were heard 
because, as I indicated earlier, oftentimes as repugnant as 
some of these organizations' decisions may be, better to be 
inside the tent, as you have indicated, than outside the tent. 
Having been inside the tent and outside the tent, for example, 
as the head of the delegation at the U.N. Human Rights 
Commission when I was Ambassador, the predecessor to the Human 
Rights Council, and later as the deputy head of delegation on 
four occasions when we were inside the tent as members of the 
Human Rights Commission, there are arguments to be made on both 
sides of that as to points of leverage that can be used from 
both the outside and from the inside. But I would make sure 
that we made a mature, thoughtful decision before we would ever 
decide to leave an organization.
    Senator Shaheen. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. I am 
of the view that it is generally more important to be inside 
the tent looking out than outside the tent looking in.
    Ambassador Moley. As do I, Senator.
    Senator Shaheen. I will paraphrase that.
    Ms. Olsen, I very much appreciate your past experience at 
the Peace Corps and your willingness to take on the role as 
Director there. I am not going to ask you about the safety 
issue because I believe that is still a serious concern for 
Peace Corps volunteers and you have addressed that in your 
comments. And I appreciate your talking about what you would do 
as Director to address that, and I would encourage you to 
follow through on that and anything that I or this committee 
can do to help you with that I know we would be very willing to 
do so.
    Dr. Olsen. I really appreciate your comments, Senator. And 
the agency, and if I am confirmed, I look forward to working 
with you on continuing to strengthen the safety and security.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Young. Well, thank you, Senator Shaheen.
    Senator Kaine?
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the 
witnesses.
    I will start, Dr. Olsen, with you. I was at a breakfast 
this morning, and I was chatting with a young man who told me 
that he had just gotten back from being a Peace Corps volunteer 
in Latin America. And I said, well, in my committee this 
afternoon, we are going to have the nominee to be head of the 
Peace Corps before us. And he said, well, tell me about the 
nominee. I said, well, she was in the Peace Corps, and I was 
going to say other things about you, but he just stopped me and 
said, oh, I am sure she will be fine. [Laughter.]
    Senator Kaine. The 230,000, as you described, Peace Corps 
alums--they get a lot of confidence--even if they do not know 
you, they get a lot of confidence when there is a nominee who 
has lived what they have lived. And you have done that not only 
in your service in Tunisia but as a country director, regional 
director, acting chief, other capacities with the Peace Corps.
    Dr. Olsen. Thank you, Senator.
    Senator Kaine. Do we make enough use of our 230,000 Peace 
Corps veterans?
    Dr. Olsen. Senator, that is a great question. And I would 
say probably not. The return volunteers are eager to serve to 
continue in their work.
    Senator Kaine. Absolutely.
    Dr. Olsen. And I think the ways that collectively we can 
reach out and encourage their cross-cultural skills, language 
skills so that they can do even more to make communities 
stronger.
    Senator Kaine. I think the Peace Corps volunteers that I 
know, including in my own family, have so much to offer, and 
they are offering. You shared the example of the individual in 
Memphis I guess in your opening comments, which I read. They 
are doing so much on their own. They have had the experience 
that has equipped them for a life of public service. But it 
seems that there are just strategic ways we can use them to 
explain to our public the value of the kind of diplomacy and 
soft power that Peace Corps represents. And I would hope that 
one of your initiatives, obviously, the current members, 
recruiting, growing if possible, taking care of the health and 
safety needs of the current Peace Corps volunteers is the key 
responsibility. But I hope you will contemplate ways that you 
can continue to ask these wonderful returning Peace Corps 
veterans to consider doing even more because I think their 
skill set is a remarkable one.
    But congratulations to you for your nomination.
    I want to ask you, Mr. Moley, really quickly on global 
organizations. I was interested in your exchange with Jeanne 
Shaheen, Senator Shaheen. And you are right. Sometimes these 
organizations are reprehensible.
    But I will admit I was troubled by a recent move of the 
administration on an organization that was not reprehensible 
because it was only getting started. In September of 2016, the 
U.S. worked, together with other organizations at the U.N., to 
put together a global compact on migration. And the idea behind 
this global compact was that migrants and refugees are getting 
to be more and more of a constant in the world, and whether 
they are driven by natural disasters, weather emergencies, 
climate change, civil wars, corruption, we see millions and 
millions of people transiting the globe often from one 
continent to another as refugees and migrants. And that is not 
likely to change.
    And so the idea behind the global compact was maybe we, 
nations of the world, need to share our best practices again 
and really think about policies. The U.S. was sort of the 
originator of the idea of the compact, and it was nothing more 
than an effort to convene a dialogue among all nations of the 
world to determine what future best practices might be.
    In December of 2017, on the eve of the first meeting of the 
global compact on migration in Mexico, the Trump administration 
announced it would not send the U.S. representative. I think we 
were the only nation that did not have representation there.
    And I have asked State Department folks at the table why 
that is, and they have indicated that we are concerned about 
our sovereignty. They did not say that the organization was 
reprehensible. They did not evidence to anti-Israel bias. They 
said we were concerned about our sovereignty.
    Obviously, that argument would suggest we would never be 
involved in any international organization, which is an 
untenable position. And there is nothing about participating in 
a global dialogue to share best practices about how to deal 
with migrants and refugees that involves an incursion into the 
sovereignty of the United States at all.
    So I guess I would first ask, do you know anything about 
the reason for the decision of the United States to withdraw 
itself uniquely from the global compact on migration?
    Ambassador Moley. No, Senator, I do not. Having said that, 
I will commit to you that I will, if confirmed, look into it, 
and hopefully give you a more studied response.
    Senator Kaine. I would appreciate that.
    Would you agree with me that the issue of migrant and 
refugee flows in the world is a significant issue, both 
humanitarian but also a national security issue that affects 
many nations, including the United States?
    Ambassador Moley. It is clearly a significant issue. As to 
why we made that determination in December 2017, quite frankly 
I have not been read in. I do not know the deliberations that 
took place. But I will confirm to you that I will find out.
    Senator Kaine. I am proud enough--maybe sometimes too 
proud--of our country to think that we are not going to come up 
with the best solutions or policies on this issue if the United 
States is absent from the table. I do not think we have all the 
answers, but I think we have an awful lot of answers and an 
awful lot of expertise. I assume that you would share that 
opinion as well.
    Ambassador Moley. I do.
    Senator Kaine. All right. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I do not 
have other questions.
    Senator Young. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
    Mr. Moley, have you been following the situation in Eastern 
Ghouta, Syria, including the attacks by the Russians and the 
Assad regime on civilians and medical facilities?
    Ambassador Moley. Yes, Senator, and of course, I am aware 
of the sanctions--excuse me--the ceasefire that Ambassador 
Haley has managed to finally get past the Security Council 
despite delay from Russia itself, and I think she should 
deserve great credit for having achieved that this past 
Saturday.
    Senator Young. So I would echo your commendation of her 
efforts and her team's efforts. Russia has killed hundreds of 
innocent men, women, and children using its position on the 
Security Council to delay that resolution calling for a 
ceasefire.
    When Russia acts this way at the Security Council, how do 
you believe the U.S. and the international community more 
broadly should respond?
    Ambassador Moley. And, Senator, to add to that, Russia 
continues to obstruct in the way of issuing a veto just 
yesterday I believe in respect to its transmission of arms to 
Yemen. And they vetoed the sanctions against Iran that would 
have been imposed at Ambassador Haley's recommendation. So I 
think working with Ambassador Haley and her team and others of 
our ambassadors, I think we need to push back at Russia at 
every turn in regard to their vetoing peaceful resolutions that 
otherwise would be passed.
    Senator Young. Clearly they are trying to test us on many 
fronts. So I am happy with that response.
    According to its website, the U.N. Relief and Works Agency 
for Palestine refugees, or UNRWA, operates 677 elementary and 
preparatory schools in its five areas of operation, as well as 
eight secondary schools in Lebanon, for approximately 515,000 
Palestinian children. Helping to educate children who would not 
otherwise receive such education is unambiguously good. I would 
note that the United States has been the largest single donor 
to this U.N. relief agency.
    Mr. Moley, are you aware of the educational activities 
supported by this entity?
    Ambassador Moley. Yes, I am. And I agree with you, Senator, 
of their importance. There are certain other issues related to 
that of concern to us, but I do agree with the importance of 
educating children everywhere, most especially in Palestine.
    Senator Young. So you reference so many other issues. I 
will dive in. Some of the textbooks being used in these schools 
reportedly include maps that omit the state of Israel and 
include images and examples that promote violence and support 
martyrdom. If we are trying to encourage a durable peace--and 
that is what we all want, a durable peace--between the Israelis 
and Palestinians, textbooks with this sort of content are 
completely counterproductive. It is difficult for me to justify 
to my constituents using their tax dollars to support schools 
that utilize such textbooks.
    Mr. Moley, you seem to be aware of these reports. You are 
nodding affirmatively. And so if confirmed, do you commit to 
looking into this issue and reporting back to my office within 
90 days on a plan to ensure U.S. tax dollars are not supporting 
the use of textbooks that foster hate towards Israel, support 
terrorism, or degrade women?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, I do commit to supporting and 
working with you and your team on this issue. I do have a 
relationship from my time in Geneva with the head of UNRWA, 
Pierre Krahenbuhl, who at that time in Geneva was a deputy at 
the International committee of the Red Cross. And I would like 
to think that we could use your leverage, the Senate's 
leverage, and that of the State Department to make sure that 
these textbooks are not proliferated.
    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador.
    I am going to move on to the U.N. Human Rights Council. It 
was brought up earlier. What is your assessment of the council 
overall, and what do you see as the most important reforms that 
the United States should pursue with respect to the council?
    Ambassador Moley. Well, as you know, the council, 
previously the commission, was reformed in 2006 to some benefit 
but also to some not so benefit geographically in terms of 
representation. Having said that, I think it will be a 
continuing effort to assure that countries do not join or not 
voted onto the Human Rights Council principally for the purpose 
of defending themselves and using it as a forum to accuse us, 
as well as Israel, unfairly.
    Senator Young. So you have spoken to the council's 
membership on treatment of Israel, which I appreciate. I share 
that concern.
    So would membership reform be both appropriate and an 
important objective, including open ballots and competitive 
elections, were you to be confirmed?
    Ambassador Moley. Agreed, Senator, absolutely.
    Senator Young. Well, as the chairman and sitting next to 
the ranking member of the subcommittee that oversees 
multilateral institutions, would you commit to, if confirmed, 
working with my subcommittee and my office, where possible, 
related to U.N. Human Rights Council reform?
    Ambassador Moley. Absolutely and unequivocally.
    Senator Young. Dr. Olsen, I am sure you would agree that 
when Americans volunteer to join the Peace Corps, as roughly 65 
Hoosiers have over the last year, we want them to be able to 
serve safely, free from violence and sexual assault. You have 
spoken I think unambiguously about that, and I am grateful for 
that.
    In preparation for this hearing, have you reviewed the Nick 
Castle Peace Corps Reform Act of 2018? I think the name was 
invoked earlier. I am not sure the legislation was.
    Dr. Olsen. Yes.
    Senator Young. Could you speak to any general impressions 
you have regarding the bill?
    Dr. Olsen. Thank you, Senator.
    It is an excellent bill, and it provides the opportunity 
for Peace Corps to continue to take very strong steps towards 
health and safety of the volunteer, particularly the health of 
the volunteer. And I look forward, if confirmed, to carry out 
the elements of the bill and to continue to enhance the health 
care of every single Peace Corps volunteer.
    Senator Young. I think you indicated earlier--you must have 
been referencing this legislation----
    Dr. Olsen. Yes.
    Senator Young.--where Senate committee staff worked with 
Peace Corps staff. And my supposition is that, if confirmed, 
you would commit your staff to engaging this committee on all 
future reform efforts like that.
    Dr. Olsen. Absolutely, Senator.
    Senator Young. Senator Merkley?
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    This month, Senator Young and I sent the Senate and House 
Appropriations committees a letter detailing severe food 
shortages worldwide and requested increased funding for the 
World Food Program. I am directing this to Ambassador Moley. If 
confirmed, will you advocate for additional funding for the 
WFP? And what steps will you take to rally the international 
community to address a number of famines that we have currently 
ongoing around the world?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, as you know, we are the largest 
contributor to the World Food Program, currently at 39 percent. 
I was obviously not part of the deliberations or determinations 
that prepared the current 2019 budget or the 2018 budget. 
Having said that, I would urge additional funding, whether it 
comes from the United States or other participants, to the 
World Food Program. We face four major famines currently, 
Yemen, Nigeria, Sudan, and Somalia, and potentially elsewhere. 
And obviously, the World Food Program--although you and I had a 
conversation last evening about better to teach a person to 
fish than to give them the fish, nonetheless, if there are no 
fishes available, one has to send fishes to the people that 
need it most.
    Senator Merkley. I think you have summarized our 
conversation exactly right. [Laughter.]
    Senator Merkley. I was just speaking earlier today with 
some experts on Sudan who were noting the fact that so much of 
the challenge there is coming from the chaos and disruption of 
war that has made normal activities that one might support 
their family with incredibly difficult to the point of 
producing a famine.
    My colleague, Senator Young, has noted that in Yemen just 
the enormous difficulty of even getting relief into the 
country. And he continues to champion cranes, and I have not 
heard you talk about loading cranes today. I am kind of 
surprised about that. He has continued to say we have got to 
make sure that we address these famines.
    I want to turn back to the United Nations Relief and Works 
Agency. My colleague pointed out the enormous critique we have 
of some of the material in the textbooks. What UNRWA has done 
is follow U.N. policy which is to use the textbooks provided by 
the host nation. But they have then instructed their teachers 
not to teach that material that is offensive and to provide 
supplemental materials. What else should be done to address 
this situation?
    Ambassador Moley. Senator, I suspect much needs to be done. 
Having said that, I have not been read into the situation as it 
currently exists. Having said that, I pledge to you that I 
will, A. And B, I do believe that my relationship with Pierre 
Krahenbuhl, the current head of UNRWA, will serve me well in 
that function. And I look forward to working with both you and 
the chairman and working cooperatively and making sure we are 
all on the same page in respect to the exact circumstances on 
the ground, if confirmed.
    Senator Merkley. Great. I will look forward to your 
insights on that.
    And it is my understanding that the Government of Israel 
supports this aid. They recognize that it is very hard to have 
an economy in the West Bank because it is isolated. It is 
surrounded and does not have easy access for inputs to an 
economy or an ability to get goods out to sell to the world, 
and that having these 500,000 children in school learning and 
being able to, hopefully, contribute in some way is better than 
having 500,000 children out of school. And they also do a 
tremendous amount on health care as well.
    Do you share the view that it is helpful in this 
challenging situation to have this investment in health care 
and education?
    Ambassador Moley. Absolutely and unequivocally.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    Then I just wanted to toss an open question your way. You 
can answer it as quickly or as at length as you would like, but 
you served as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations missions in 
Geneva. What did you learn from that experience in terms of the 
value of multilateral engagement?
    Ambassador Moley. Multilateral engagement is a keystone to 
American diplomacy as reflected in pillar four of the National 
Security Strategy that was outlined by the President and 
released in December of 2017.
    I think one of the most disappointing things I did learn, 
however, Senator, was that oftentimes our friends mistook 
compromise with concession. Much of that I believe comes from 
their own past experiences, colonial powers in Africa and 
elsewhere. And I found that quite regrettable at times.
    Having said that, we as a nation stand on principle and 
lead by example, and I would like to think that we could 
continue to do so.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    And I guess I do have one last question for you, which is 
you mentioned it is sometimes better to be inside the tent than 
outside. The Paris Accord or Paris Agreement is based on the 
U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, and at this point, 
we would officially come out about November 2020 I believe is 
the date. Are there reasons to stay deeply engaged between now 
and then and perhaps to stay longer in terms of taking on the 
challenge of climate?
    Ambassador Moley. In respect to remaining engaged, 
absolutely, Senator. The fact is that the President made clear 
in the G-20's leaders declaration that we remain committed to 
mitigating greenhouse gas emissions. And I take that charge 
very seriously whether it is inside or outside.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    Senator Young. Well, that concludes panel number one, and I 
would like to thank both of you for your time and your interest 
in serving. We will briefly adjourn in order to allow the 
nominees for panel number two to take their places at the 
table. [Recess.]
    Senator Young. I would like to call this hearing back to 
order for panel number two.
    Once again, I would like to welcome Mr. Erik Bethel and Mr. 
Sean Cairncross. Mr. Bethel is nominated to be the United 
States Alternate Executive Director of the International Bank 
for Reconstruction and Development. Mr. Cairncross is nominated 
to be the Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium Challenge 
Corporate, or MCC.
    With that, I welcome you, Mr. Bethel, to provide your 
opening comments in 5 minutes or less, please.

   STATEMENT OF ERIK BETHEL, OF FLORIDA, TO BE UNITED STATES 
  ALTERNATE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR 
     RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT FOR A TERM OF TWO YEARS

    Mr. Bethel. Thank you, Senator. Chairman Young, Ranking 
Member Merkley, and distinguished members of the Foreign 
Relations committee, it is a great privilege to appear before 
you today.
    I am honored that President Trump nominated me to serve as 
the U.S. Alternate Executive Director for the International 
Bank for Reconstruction and Development. I am grateful for the 
support of the President and also for the support of Secretary 
Mnuchin.
    Before I begin, I would like to introduce the members of my 
family sitting in the audience today: my wife Michelle; my 
children, Ana Cristina, Niko, and Panchi; and my mother Diana 
who is an emigre from Cuba. I would also like to acknowledge my 
late father, Paul Bethel, who spent a career in public service 
with the U.S. Department of State. His legacy is critical to my 
being with you here today. Most importantly, I am especially 
grateful to have my wife Michelle in my life and for her 
continued support of my desire to serve our nation.
    I have long aspired to work in the public sector, 
especially----
    Senator Young. Mr. Bethel, if I could just interrupt. My 
apologies. I understand we have votes around 4 o'clock, and I 
have consulted with the ranking member. If there is any way to 
condense any comments--the same with you, Mr. Cairncross--I 
think we can probably get our questions done before the vote 
and will not have to return.
    Mr. Bethel. Certainly.
    Senator Young. Thank you, sir.
    Mr. Bethel. I have long aspired to work in the public 
sector, especially in the capacity of finance and emerging 
markets and poverty reduction. Furthermore, I strongly believe 
in the mission of the World Bank, and I look forward to sharing 
my objectives with you as a candidate and to answering any 
questions you might have.
    For more than 2 decades, I have worked at the intersection 
of finance and emerging markets. I have also lived and I have 
worked in Latin America. I speak Spanish and I speak Mandarin 
and I speak Portuguese. If confirmed, I will utilize by 
professional experiences to promote the mission of the World 
Bank and to further U.S. interests.
    Cycles of corruption, poverty and crime pose an enduring 
threat to the immense potential of the developing world, and I 
believe it is important to address these issues. We would be 
wise to heed the words of Edmund Burke, who said that the only 
thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do 
nothing. If the developing world is to realize the future it 
deserves, it must overcome these longstanding obstacles with 
the support of the organization like the World Bank.
    And if confirmed, I would seek to leverage the U.S. 
contributions to the bank to ensure that its finance efforts 
are used productively and that they remain consistent with our 
nation's foreign policy interests. And I will also advocate for 
additional efforts to curb corruption, human trafficking, and 
abuses of power in order to promote opportunities for those in 
the developing world to live longer, healthier, and better 
lives.
    Finally, if confirmed as Alternate Executive Director of 
the IBRD, I will work closely with members of this committee 
and its staff and with other Members of Congress to perform my 
responsibilities as effectively as possible.
    Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to appear 
before you and other members of the committee, and I look 
forward to your questions. Thank you.
    [Mr. Bethel's prepared statement follows:]


                   Prepared Statement of Erik Bethel

    Chairman Corker, Ranking Member Cardin, and distinguished members 
of the Foreign Relations committee, it is a great privilege to appear 
before you today. I am honored that President Trump nominated me to 
serve as the United States Alternate Executive Director of the 
International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, and I am 
grateful for the support of the President and Secretary Mnuchin.
    Before I begin, I'd like to introduce members of my family sitting 
in the audience today: my wife Michelle, my children Ana Cristina, 
Nicolas, and Panchi, and my mother Diana, an emigre from Cuba. I would 
also like to acknowledge my late father Paul Bethel who spent a career 
in public service with the U.S. Department of State. His legacy is 
critical to my being here with you today. Most importantly, I'm 
especially grateful to have my wife Michelle in my life, and for her 
continued support of my desire to serve our nation.
    I've long aspired to work in the public sector, especially in the 
capacity of finance, emerging markets, and poverty reduction. 
Furthermore, I strongly believe in the mission of the World Bank. I 
look forward to sharing my objectives as a candidate and to answering 
any questions involving my qualifications and experiences.
    For more than two decades, I have worked at the intersection of 
finance and emerging markets. I have also lived and worked in Latin 
America and Asia. If confirmed, I will utilize my professional 
experiences to promoting the mission of the World Bank and furthering 
U.S. interests.
    Cycles of corruption, poverty, and crime pose an enduring threat to 
the immense potential of the developing world. I believe that it is 
important to address these issues. We would be wise to heed the words 
of Edmund Burke who said, ``The only thing necessary for the triumph of 
evil is for good men to do nothing.'' If the developing world is to 
realize the future it deserves, it must overcome these longstanding 
obstacles with the support of organizations like the World Bank.
    If confirmed, I would seek to leverage the U.S. contributions to 
the bank in order to ensure that its finance efforts are used 
productively and that they remain consistent with our nation's foreign 
policy interests. I will also advocate for additional efforts to curb 
corruption, human trafficking, and abuses of power in order to promote 
opportunities for those in the developing world to live longer, 
healthier, and better lives. Finally, if confirmed as Alternate 
Executive Director of the IBRD, I will work closely with the members of 
this committee and its staff, and with other Members of Congress, to 
perform my responsibilities as effectively as possible.
    Mr. Chairman, I thank you for this opportunity to appear before you 
and the other members of the committee, and I look forward to your 
questions.


    Senator Young. Thank you.
    Mr. Cairncross?

    STATEMENT OF SEAN CAIRNCROSS, OF MINNESOTA, TO BE CHIEF 
      EXECUTIVE OFFICER, MILLENNIUM CHALLENGE CORPORATION

    Mr. Cairncross. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I would like to start by thanking Senator Cornyn for his 
thoughtful introduction, and I appreciate his confidence in my 
nomination. I have always been proud to have worked for him, 
and I am hopeful that I will be able to continue working with 
him going forward.
    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, members of the 
committee, it is a privilege to appear before you today as 
President Trump's nominee to serve as the next Chief Executive 
Officer of the Millennium Challenge Corporation.
    And if I could just beg the committee's indulgence for a 
quick second, I would like to introduce the members of my 
family here today. No one does anything alone. Or at least, I 
have not. And I have been blessed with a great support network. 
This is dad and mom, Andy and Donna; my sister-in-law Margaret; 
my wife Emily whom I met when I was 6. And these are my kids, 
India and Dominic. I met them when I was older. [Laughter.]
    Mr. Cairncross. I have been interested in foreign affairs 
and America's role in the world since I was a boy growing up in 
Minnesota. As a student, I studied international relations both 
in Washington, D.C. and overseas in England and as a graduate 
student living in England. Living abroad gave me an 
appreciation for the importance of how our country is perceived 
overseas and the power our country has to inspire and to be a 
force for good in the world.
    I became involved in national politics as a means to 
becoming engaged in the American democratic process and in 
government. I served in senior management positions in two 
national party committees, overseeing hundreds of employees and 
budgets that aggregated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. 
When I served as chief operating officer and general counsel to 
these organizations, I was responsible for the reporting and 
the compliance of these highly regulated, highly scrutinized, 
very visible organizations. And I feel very fortunate to have 
gained this management experience while also actively 
participating in the democratic process.
    I entered government when I joined the White House in 
January 2017. During my time in the administration, I have had 
the opportunity to participate in the national security 
policymaking process, and I have gained a practical respect to 
complement my formerly academic appreciation for the role of 
American soft power and U.S. foreign engagement.
    Emily and I do our best to teach our children what it means 
to be an American and to appreciate it. Indeed, my daughter 
India just returned last week from New York in a model United 
Nations program. And it is our sincere hope that they leave 
today's hearing remaining interested in U.S. engagement and 
assured that America is a constant force for good in the world. 
That good governance, economic freedom, and ruling justly are 
not just words but concrete values that America supports 
throughout the world to improve lives and support her 
interests.
    I am honored and humbled to be nominated to lead the 
Millennium Challenge Corporation, which embodies this. It 
provides a framework that mobilizes these ideals while also 
requiring partner country commitment and holding partner 
countries accountable.
    If confirmed, I have three overarching priorities that I 
would pursue.
    First, I would maintain the MCC's model, its strong track 
record of data-driven, accountable results. And I would seek to 
deepen the bipartisan support the agency has enjoyed. And to do 
this, I would rely on MCC's deeply knowledgeable, talented, and 
diverse staff.
    Second, I would seek to increase collaboration with other 
U.S. Government agencies and third party partners, in 
particular U.S. businesses, and maximize the crowding in of 
these resources, as well as the crowding in of domestic partner 
country resources.
    Finally, I would like to help realize the potential of 
regional compacts. Legislation pending here before the Senate 
would open the door to MCC's being able to build regional 
markets, and I believe that if carefully done and done in a 
focused manner, there is great potential there.
    Mr. Chairman, the MCC is a tremendous asset in America's 
foreign policy toolkit. If confirmed, I would commit to work 
hand in hand with this committee, with Congress, with the 
administration, and other MCC stakeholders to maintain its 
record of bipartisan support and measured accountability.
    I am honored to be here. I look forward to answering any of 
your questions. Thank you.
    [Mr. Cairncross's prepared statement follows:]


                 Prepared Statement of Sean Cairncross

    Before I begin, I'd like to thank Senator Cornyn for his thoughtful 
introduction; I am grateful for his trust and confidence in my 
nomination, and I am proud to have worked for him.
    Chairman Young, Ranking Member Merkley, members of the committee, 
it is a privilege to appear before you today as President Trump's 
nominee to serve as the next Chief Executive Officer of the Millennium 
Challenge Corporation.
    If I could beg the committee's indulgence, I would like to thank 
the members of my family who are here today. Nobody accomplishes 
anything alone--or at least I haven't--and I've been very fortunate to 
be surrounded by strong support. This is mom and dad, Donna and Andy. 
This is my sister-in-law, Margaret. And this is my wife, Emily--whom I 
met when I was six--and these are my children, India and Dominic.
    I have been interested in foreign affairs and America's role in the 
world since I was a boy, growing up in Minnesota. As a student, I 
studied international relations, both as an undergraduate, in 
Washington D.C. and England, and as a graduate student in England. 
Living abroad gave me an appreciation for the importance of how our 
country is perceived overseas--and the power that the United States has 
to inspire and be a force for good in the world. I became involved in 
national politics as a means to become involved in the American 
democratic process and government. I served in senior management in two 
national party committees, overseeing hundreds of employees and budgets 
that aggregated in the hundreds of millions of dollars. When I served 
as chief operating officer and general counsel to these organizations, 
I was responsible for the compliance and reporting of these highly 
visible, scrutinized, and regulated entities. I feel fortunate to have 
gained this management experience while actively participating in our 
nation's electoral process.
    I entered government when I joined the White House in January 2017. 
During my time in the Trump administration I've had the opportunity to 
participate in the national security policy making process, and I have 
gained a practical respect--to compliment my formerly academic 
appreciation--of the importance of American soft power and U.S. global 
engagement.
    Emily and I do our best to teach our children to appreciate what it 
means to be an American. Indeed, India just participated in a model 
United Nations program in New York last weekend. It is our wish that 
they remain interested in U.S. engagement, and it is our hope that they 
leave this hearing today with a deeper understanding, and assurance, 
that the United States is a constant force for good in the world. That 
good governance, economic freedom, and ruling justly are not just 
words, but concrete values that America supports throughout the world 
to improve lives and support her interests.
    The Millennium Challenge Corporation embodies this, providing a 
framework that mobilizes these ideals while also requiring partner 
country commitment and holding partner countries accountable for 
results. I am honored and humbled to be nominated to lead such a unique 
and effective agency.
    Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will take the lead at MCC during an 
exciting, yet challenging time for the agency and the development 
community at large. With this in mind, I have three overarching 
priorities that I'd plan to pursue.
    First, I would maintain MCC's model, and its track-record of 
transparent, data-driven results--and its strong history of bi-partisan 
support--and I will rely on MCC's deeply knowledgeable, diverse, and 
talented professional staff in doing so.
    Second, I would seek to increase collaboration with U.S. Government 
agencies and third party partners, particularly U.S. businesses--and 
maximize the ``crowding in'' of domestic partner country resources.
    Finally, I'd like to help realize the potential of regional 
compacts. Legislation pending with the Senate would open the door for 
the MCC to engage in regional market building. I believe that, done 
correctly, there is tremendous potential to increase MCC's impact. Mr. 
Chairman, MCC is a great asset in America's foreign policy toolbox. 
Should I be confirmed to lead it, I commit that I will work hand in 
hand with this committee, Congress, and the administration to maintain 
MCC's bi-partisan support and its standard of measurable accountability 
in reducing poverty through economic growth.
    I look forward to discussing these, and other matters concerning 
MCC today--and, hopefully, in the future.


    Senator Young. Thank you, Mr. Cairncross. You quickly 
summarized your professional background. What professional 
qualities have prepared you to assume this position? Give me a 
concise answer, one of two things, please.
    Mr. Cairncross. Yes, sir. My management experience 
overseeing two organizations national in scope, subject to an 
enormous amount of scrutiny, in particular on their budgets, 
how the money is raised and spent, and as counsel, being 
responsible for the compliance of the organization and that 
transparency is something that--and building that culture of 
compliance, which I was responsible for, is something that I 
believe is transferable to the MCC. In fact, the MCC's record 
of transparency is vital to the agency, and I intend to 
continue that.
    Senator Young. Mr. Cairncross, I am glad you emphasized the 
importance of the term is in the development community 
``crowding in'' private sector resources in compact countries 
served by MCC. What more can we do in this particular area to 
get more money crowded in?
    Mr. Cairncross. Sure. Thank you for the question, Senator.
    There are several different avenues to this. The study that 
you co-chaired with Senator Shaheen noted that where U.S. 
foreign assistance is engaged in a country, it is a relatively 
small portion. In fact, 50 percent of that or so is private 
capital flowing in. And so I would seek to increase that 
engagement. I think the efforts being made, for example, in 
Ghana and the compact that we are engaged in there and the 
stamp of approval that the MCC creates in working with these 
governments to create institutional reform targeted at 
corruption, for example, really helps engage that private 
sector capital. I think there is also, on the other end of it, 
maximizing the leverage that other entities bring, such as 
OPIC, and working to de-risk these environments and draw more 
capital in.
    Senator Young. Our office will continue to look closely at 
this matter. We want to be supportive however possible. So, if 
confirmed, if you discover that additional authorities or 
resources are needed in order to optimize the involvement of 
the private sector, will you let myself and our office know so 
that we can work with MCC to get you those resources and/or 
authorities?
    Mr. Cairncross. Absolutely. I appreciate it.
    Senator Young. Thank you.
    Mr. Cairncross, with regard to the choice of MCC compact 
recipients, what weight would you place on a country's 
scorecard performance versus its strategic importance to the 
United States?
    Mr. Cairncross. Sure. Senator, I think the MCC has a great 
track record of success because it has adhered to a very 
objective model in country selection. And so those eligibility 
criteria and good governance, economic freedom, and investment 
in the people are key to the agency's success.
    I think that with respect to the larger strategic interests 
of the United States, the way I view it is MCC is not deployed 
necessarily strategically, but where it is active, it serves to 
buttress and support U.S. strategic interests.
    And then finally, the board of directors that works with 
the MCC and oversees it is really there to provide that last 
overarching spectrum of policy input over the MCC's objective 
criteria. So before a country is selected, eligible for a 
compact, even if it hits those criteria, it still needs to be 
approved by the board of directors in order to engage in a 
compact.
    Senator Young. So your point is there is already a measure 
of discretion built into the system because the board of 
directors is able to exercise its oversight.
    Mr. Cairncross. There is, sir. There is a measure of 
discretion that is built in on that level. And then there is 
also the threshold programs of the MCC which address countries 
that do not quite meet that eligibility criteria but are on the 
verge and through institutional reforms may be able to get 
there.
    Senator Young. Thank you.
    Senator Merkley?
    Senator Merkley. Thank you much, both of you.
    And the question I wanted to ask you, Mr. Bethel, is 
related to the loans that the World Bank has made to Burma. The 
Government of Burma and the military of Burma have been engaged 
in a massive ethnic cleansing operation resulting in more than 
300 villages burned, children killed, women and daughters 
raped, fathers slaughtered, and have driven more than--well, 
now--almost 700,000 people across the border.
    In that type of situation, how should the World Bank 
respond to use its leverage? Should it cut off loans? Should it 
make them contingent upon dramatic changes in the governance? 
Should it say we will lend you money, but it has to go to very 
specific projects and monitor it carefully? Should it insist 
that international organizations be admitted to Rakhine State 
before any additional assistance is provided? How can the IBRD 
use its leverage or how should it use its leverage?
    Mr. Bethel. Thank you, Senator. I think that is a very 
important consideration. Having been to Burma in the last 
couple of years, I am very familiar with the issue, the 
Rohingya issue, that you are referring to, and it is a very 
challenging and complicated issue.
    It is too early to say, at least in my estimation, what 
should be done until and if I am fortunate enough to be 
confirmed. I do not know that it would be appropriate for me to 
comment on the specific World Bank policy or loans that are 
being administered or not in this case. But the general 
sentiment is one where the World Bank should not be lending to 
countries that either are state sponsors of terror or that are 
committing atrocious acts on their own population generally 
speaking.
    I appreciate the question, and should I be confirmed, I 
would be delighted to work with your committee on addressing 
the issue.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you. I appreciate that.
    And, Mr. Cairncross, when you studied international 
relations at American University I believe----
    Mr. Cairncross. Yes, sir.
    Senator Merkley.--did you specialize in any particular area 
of international relations, Middle East policy, Asian policy, 
national security, any particular aspect?
    Mr. Cairncross. Sure. Both my college undergraduate thesis 
and my graduate dissertation were done in intelligence.
    Senator Merkley. In intelligence. And so in the course of 
that, did you take a lot of courses that were basically related 
to the third world economic development?
    Mr. Cairncross. I did take an international economics 
course at Cambridge, sir.
    Senator Merkley. Focused on developing nations?
    Mr. Cairncross. Developing nations were a portion of the 
course, yes.
    Senator Merkley. And can you share with us if you have had 
the opportunity to live in or--we had the Peace Corps up here 
earlier--any projects you have had in developing nations?
    Mr. Cairncross. No, sir. I have not lived in a developing 
nation. And if confirmed, one of the first things I would plan 
to do is to travel and put my feet on the ground and deal with 
the host government and put my eyes on MCC's work.
    Senator Merkley. Have you currently traveled to any of the 
compact nations?
    Mr. Cairncross. I have not, Senator, but that would be an 
immediate priority of mine.
    Senator Merkley. Do you speak any foreign languages?
    Mr. Cairncross. I do not, sir.
    Senator Merkley. I wanted to ask you a couple questions 
related to Reince Priebus, your work with him as top advisor to 
the chief of staff. And you have already answered these. I know 
the answers, but I think it is valuable to have them on the 
record unless I got the answers wrong.
    Did you have any involvement in the development or 
execution of the President's Muslim ban?
    Mr. Cairncross. I did not, sir.
    Senator Merkley. Did you have any discussions involved in 
the firing of Jim Comey?
    Mr. Cairncross. No, sir.
    Senator Merkley. Have you been interviewed or do you expect 
to be interviewed as part of Robert Mueller's Russia 
investigation?
    Mr. Cairncross. I have not been, and I do not expect to be.
    Senator Merkley. So the MCC is a partner to more 
conventional U.S. aid and development. What do you see as kind 
of the valuable--what do you see as most significant about its 
unique strategy?
    Mr. Cairncross. I think the MCC is so unique because it 
occupies a very singular niche along the development arc of a 
country that it is working with. And so it is really 
transitioning from that USAID portion to a place where a 
country is attempting to build a sustainable economy. And it is 
a need and merit system. So the agency is looking to 
consolidate gains in poor countries who are pursuing good 
policies, pursuing open government, economic freedom for their 
people, and investing into their people. And that singular 
mission, with the staff that I have met and dealt with at the 
MCC who are so impressive--they are very mission-driven. It is 
a very professional organization, and I think that makes it 
very unique.
    I also, Senator, think it is unique in the respect that all 
of its projects are tracked and measured, and that is not just 
some internal MCC white paper. It is measured by independent 
third party agencies and organizations. And then that is put 
online and put out into the public. And that builds, I believe, 
great confidence in the MCC's expenditure of taxpayer dollars 
and helps make the case for U.S. assistance.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    One of the issues that has come up has been reports that 
the eight political positions that are at MCC--that there are 
plans by the White House to expand that to more than two dozen. 
Are you familiar with those plans, and do you have an opinion 
on that?
    Mr. Cairncross. I am not familiar with those plans, 
Senator. I should say I appreciate the time that you and I have 
spent discussing the matter and with your staff. And what I can 
commit to you is that, if confirmed, I would strive to keep the 
MCC a performance-based professional development organization. 
I think both its bipartisan support that it has enjoyed and the 
confidence of its talented staff and maintaining that staff is 
key to the agency's success.
    Senator Merkley. So you would not support expanding the 
political positions beyond the eight positions that there are 
currently on the staff.
    Mr. Cairncross. Correct, Senator. I am not looking to 
politicize the MCC.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    And I thought I should give you a chance to just comment on 
the racial bias lawsuit that was at RNC. It was settled, and I 
assume those were not government funds that it was settled 
with. Those were campaign side funds?
    Mr. Cairncross. That is correct. They were campaign private 
donations to the committee.
    Senator Merkley. And do you support diversity and 
nondiscrimination within the organization?
    Mr. Cairncross. Absolutely, Senator. I believe it is a very 
important--I believe diversity should be a celebrated thing. I 
believe it enriches the work environment. I believe 
particularly in an agency like the MCC it leads to better 
decision-making and, if confirmed, I would seek to grow the 
agency's diversity.
    Senator Merkley. Thank you.
    Senator Young. Well, I want to thank our nominees for 
appearing here today. That concludes our hearing.
    For the information of members, the record will remain open 
until the close of business on Thursday, including for members 
to submit questions for the record.
    Thank you again to each of you.
    This hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 4:00 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]



                              ----------                              



              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
         Hon. Kevin Edward Moley by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy?

   What has been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. In 2002, while serving as U.S. Ambassador at U.N. Geneva, I 
chaired the U.S. Delegation to the U.N. Human Rights Commission 
(precursor to the Human Rights Council). In 2003, 2004, and 2005, I 
served as Deputy Chair of the U.N. Human Rights Commission. In each 
session of the Human Rights Commission in which I participated we named 
and shamed nations around the world which we believed were violating 
their citizens' human rights.
    Additionally, I served as Chair of an NGO named PCI Global and in 
that capacity have traveled to Africa and Latin America. This has 
reinforced my strong believe that the United States must lead in 
advocating for human rights around the world, including at home.

    Question 2. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in 
the Foreign Service?

    Answer. Throughout my career, I believe I have demonstrated my 
commitment to promoting the careers of those from backgrounds not 
traditionally represented in the State Department. Ambassador Linda 
Thomas Greenfield, who served with me in Geneva went on to become 
Ambassador to Liberia, Director General of the Foreign Service and, 
most recently, Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs, Linda 
was kind enough to attend my hearing in support of my nomination. 
Ambassador Joel Danies, recently confirmed to be our Ambassador to 
Gabon, is our first Haitian born American to be confirmed as a United 
States Ambassador; he was my deputy in Geneva and an important advisor 
to me.
    I will continue, as I have throughout my government and private 
sector career, to seek out talented individual from all backgrounds to 
serve with me, and ensure they have the tools to succeed in their 
careers.

    Question 3. What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors within the Bureau of International Organizations are 
fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that all supervisors in the 
Bureau of International Organizations are fostering an environment that 
is diverse and inclusive, and will tolerate nothing less. This will be 
a priority of my leadership, if confirmed.

    Question 4. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. If confirmed, I commit to comply with all relevant federal 
ethics laws, regulations, and rules, to exercise leadership within the 
Department to promote compliance with those laws and rules and to raise 
concerns that I may have through appropriate channels.

    Question 5. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. If confirmed, I commit to comply with all relevant federal 
ethics laws, regulations, and rules, to exercise leadership within the 
Department to promote compliance with those laws and rules, and to 
raise concerns that I may have through appropriate channels.

    Question 6. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in any country abroad?

    Answer. My investment portfolio includes companies that have a 
presence abroad. I am committed to ensuring that my official actions 
will not give rise to a conflict of interest. I will divest my 
interests in those companies the State Department Ethics Office deemed 
necessary to avoid a conflict of interest and will remain vigilant with 
regard to my ethics obligations.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
        Hon. Kevin Edward Moley by Senator Christopher A. Coons

    Question 1. If confirmed as Assistant Secretary of State for 
International Organization Affairs, are you committed to working with 
the Senate and House of Representatives on a bill to review the United 
States' contributions to multilateral organizations, the Multilateral 
Aid Review Act of 2017 (S.1928)?

    Answer. Yes. I am committed to rigorous and effective oversight of 
international organizations. I agree that assessing the use of U.S. 
taxpayer funding to international organizations is essential to ensure 
funding is being used as effectively and efficiently as possible. The 
Bureau of International Organization Affairs coordinates the oversight 
of international organizations that receive U.S. funding directly 
through their governance bodies and indirectly through independent 
review entities. If confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to engage 
closely with the experts at the State Department on how best to 
reinforce this critical oversight, and commit to working with both the 
Senate and the House of Representatives on the bill and its objectives.



                               __________

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
           Hon. Kevin Edward Moley by Senator Cory A. Booker

    Question 1. Last month, the administration announced that it is 
withholding the bulk-approximately 83 percent-of the United States's 
annual contribution to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine 
Refugees (UNRWA). Established by the U.N. General Assembly in 1949, 
UNRWA provides an array of critical services to Palestinian refugees in 
the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria.
    Jordan hosts the largest Palestinian refugee population in the 
Middle East: more than two million people in total. I have personally 
visited UNRWA sites in Jordan.
    The services provided by UNRWA are an important safety valve for 
the Jordanian Government, which is also currently hosting more than 
600,000 Syrian refugees and whose resources are spread increasingly 
thin.

   How do these proposed budget cuts risk harming our Jordanian 
        allies, whose cooperation we need on a host of critical 
        security issues, including counterterrorism?
   How does undermining the Jordanian Government serve our strategic 
        interests?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would support the U.S. commitment to Jordan 
and to addressing the needs of the most vulnerable, as demonstrated by 
the voluntary contribution by the United States of $60 million to UNRWA 
in January to keep schools and health systems operating in Jordan, the 
West Bank, and Gaza. Jordan remains one of the United States' closest 
allies. Secretary Tillerson underscored the enduring value of that 
partnership during his February 2018 visit to Jordan when he signed a 
new five-year, $6.375 billion Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with 
Foreign Minister Safadi. The MOU, along with the U.S.-Jordanian 
partnership on a range of issues, demonstrates the depth and breadth of 
this important bilateral relationship. In addition, since the start of 
the Syrian crisis, the United States, through the Bureau for 
Population, Refugees, and Migration as well as USAID/Food for Peace, 
provided nearly $1.1 billion in humanitarian aid for programs to the 
Syrian response in Jordan to meet the life-saving needs of refugees, 
including food, shelter, and water, in addition to humanitarian 
assistance at the regional level to support Iraqi, Palestinian, and 
other refugees in Jordan.

    Question 2. With regards to the U.N. Organization Stabilization 
Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUSCO), can you 
commit to me that if confirmed, you will not seek or advance any 
proposals to further diminish MONUSCO's size, capacity, or budget in 
the absence of real progress toward greater civilian security on the 
ground?

    Answer. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring that the United States 
carefully reviews and analyzes each U.N. peacekeeping mission as its 
mandate comes up for renewal to evaluate whether it is appropriate to 
the current situation in the country and to determine how it is 
advancing U.S. objectives and interests. I understand that the mandate 
for MONUSCO will be renewed by the U.N. Security Council on March 27, 
and that the U.N. made the decision to reduce MONUSCO's troop strength 
in March 2017 by drawing down underperforming troops in order to 
increase overall effectiveness while sending an important signal to 
other poor performers that they must improve.
    If confirmed, I commit to a rigorous and objective examination of 
each mission, which is vital to ensuring that U.N. peacekeeping 
missions have realistic and achievable mandates which advance political 
solutions, have the support of host governments, and maintain clear 
exit strategies. I look forward to working with you and members of the 
committee, if confirmed, and with other U.N. Security Council members 
to reach consensus on supporting a MONUSCO mission that is responsive, 
flexible, and able to actively and effectively fulfill its mandated 
tasks, especially protecting civilians and supporting the electoral 
process.

    Question 3. In your view, has the U.N. Security Council over-
burdened MONUSCO--or any other U.N. peacekeeping operations--with too 
unrealistic or cumbersome of a mandate? If so, how will you seek to 
address this problem if confirmed?

    Answer. The Secretary-General and MONUSCO leadership have 
consistently called for greater streamlining of the Mission's tasks. If 
confirmed, I will work with the Security Council, other U.N. member 
states, and the U.N. to address critical structural, bureaucratic, 
operational, and political challenges to maximize the effectiveness of 
MONUSCO and of all U.N. peacekeeping missions. This effort would 
include seeking opportunities for U.N. humanitarian and development 
agencies to assume tasks better suited to their expertise, seeking to 
eliminate extraneous capabilities or programming, and working to 
institutionalize a culture of performance at the U.N. in which only the 
highest performing troops and police are deployed to U.N. missions.
    To date, with an authorized troop ceiling of 16,215 military 
personnel, 660 military observers and staff officers, and 1,441 police, 
and an annual budget of $1.1 billion, MONUSCO remains one of the 
largest and most expensive U.N. peacekeeping missions. There has been a 
peacekeeping presence in the DRC since 1999, and over the years the 
U.N. Security Council has added numerous tasks, which have diverted 
resources from the core mission of civilian protection and 
stabilization. MONUSCO is stretched to capacity to fully execute its 
mandate, and the DRC Government at times actively undermines the 
Mission. MONUSCO also faces operational challenges stemming from the 
size of the country, the lack of infrastructure, the lack of capacity 
of the national security forces, the number of armed groups, and the 
unwillingness of some troop contributors to conduct offensive 
operations. If confirmed, I look forward to further reviewing these and 
other issues to ensure the MONUSCO mandate is appropriate and 
effective.

    Question 4. What will you do to ensure that MONUSCO is best 
positioned to confront the numerous serious challenges facing the 
country ahead of the planned elections in December 2018?

    Answer. In the U.N. Security Council, the United States has called 
for MONUSCO to be more responsive to the needs of the Congolese people, 
and to adapt the Mission when necessary as the political landscape 
changes. If confirmed, I will continue to urge MONUSCO to prioritize 
the protection of civilians and electoral support tasks, to direct 
budgetary resources so they are aligned with these priorities, and to 
continue reporting to the U.N. Security Council on the progress of 
electoral timelines and on implementation of the December 31, 2016 
Agreement.
    I commit to work with you to ensure that the United States engages 
its international partners, the U.N., and the DRC Government to support 
the conduct of peaceful, inclusive, timely, and credible elections in 
2018. Due to the lack of basic infrastructure in the DRC and its sheer 
size, elections will not be possible without the technical, logistical, 
political, and security support of MONUSCO. The U.N. Security Council 
prioritized MONUSCO's electoral support task, including supporting 
implementation of the December 31, 2016 Agreement, during the 2017 
mandate renewal. I understand that MONUSCO meets regularly with the DRC 
Government, opposition, and the Independent National Electoral 
Commission (CENI) to advance the Agreement, with a key focus on 
promoting implementation of its confidence-building measures.

    Question 5. What can be done to ensure that peacekeeping troop 
contributors can adequately protect themselves from attacks like the 
one that occurred in December?

    Answer. If confirmed, I commit to reviewing how we can do more to 
ensure peacekeeping forces can adequately protect themselves. As your 
question highlights, the past several years have seen a dramatic 
increase in fatal attacks on U.N. peacekeepers. The December 7, 2017 
attack on MONUSCO in North Kivu was the worst attack on U.N. 
peacekeepers in recent history, resulting in the death of 15 U.N. 
peacekeepers while wounding more than 50 others. Today, as U.N. 
peacekeepers are asked to do more in increasingly complex and volatile 
environments, the U.N. Security Council owes it to these men and women 
to work hard to reform the U.N. system as urgently as possible.
    The Secretary-General's recently published ``Review of Peacekeeping 
Fatalities Due to Acts of Violence'' highlighted the link between the 
safety and security of peacekeepers and accountability for performance, 
demonstrating that underperformance can be fatal. If confirmed, I will 
work to institutionalize a culture of performance and accountability at 
the U.N. in which only the highest performing troops and police are 
deployed to U.N. missions. The lives of peacekeepers and those they are 
mandated to protect depend on it.
    Increasing the availability of objective information to support 
performance-based decision-making is an important part of making 
missions more effective on the ground and enhancing the safety and 
security of peacekeepers. This performance-based data will also help 
the United States allocate training and equipment to troop- and police-
contributing countries to better support each country's needs and 
better address the effectiveness of U.N. peacekeeping.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
            Hon. Josephine Olsen by Senator Robert Menendez

The Legacy of Kate Puzey's Murder
    I understand that Kate Puzey's death weighs heavily on you and I 
appreciate the concern that you have expressed, throughout your 
confirmation, for this tragedy. I would still like a better 
understanding of the following:

    Question 1.  At the time, what was your understanding and 
involvement in the Peace Corps' handling of the information and events 
surrounding Kate Puzey's attempts to report on the sexual abuse she 
witnessed during her assignment in Benin?

    Answer. I had no knowledge or involvement in Peace Corps' handling 
of the information surrounding Kate Puzey's attempts to report on the 
fraternization and sexual abuse she heard about during her assignment 
in Benin.

    Question 2.  At what point did you become aware of Kate Puzey's 
situation?

    Answer. I became aware of Kate's murder on/about March 12, 2009. 
After receiving preliminary information of the events that took place 
in Benin, on March 24, 2009 I asked Peace Corps' Inspector General to 
conduct a thorough investigation into the circumstances surrounding the 
matter. The Inspector General issued its report on May 7, 2009. I 
developed an understanding of the events in Benin upon receipt of the 
Inspector General's report.

    Question 3.  As Acting Director, did you administer any 
disciplinary action to anyone along the chain of command who mishandled 
Kate Puzey's attempts to report abuse?

    Answer. In 2009, Peace Corps ended employment and contractual 
relations with individuals in Benin who were involved in the management 
of or mishandling of Kate's communications and individuals in Benin 
arrested in connection with her murder.

    Question 4.  How should the Peace Corps have handled the entire 
case surrounding Kate Puzey differently?

    Answer. In retrospect, I believe Peace Corp Benin staff should have 
paid more immediate attention to the concerns raised by Kate; should 
have taken immediate measures to ensure Kate's safety pending inquiries 
and corrective actions; and, most importantly, should have taken steps 
to handle Kate's communications with more discretion and care.

    Question 5.  Are you confident that the necessary reforms have been 
made to prevent such an incident (i.e. Peace Corps volunteers or 
employees who want or need to help, or who want to report abuse, and 
protections for whistleblowers) from happening again?

    Answer. Yes. The reforms and policy changes established and 
implemented in response to the Kate Puzey Peace Corps Protection Act of 
2011, including those expressly addressing Volunteer confidentiality 
and whistleblowing, provide safeguards against similar incidents.

    Question 6.  As the Acting Director of the Peace Corps at the time 
of these incidents, what responsibility do you take for how the Peace 
Corps handled the incidents surrounding Kate Puzey?

    Answer. As Acting Director at the time of Kate's murder, I was 
responsible for all matters at the Peace Corps. However, as I explained 
above, I was not aware or involved in the events leading up to Kate's 
tragic death. While I continue to mourn the loss of Kate, I know that I 
ordered a timely investigation into the matter and took corrective 
actions where warranted. If I am confirmed, I assure you I will 
vigorously advance and, where appropriate, improve upon all measures to 
ensure the safety and health of Peace Corps volunteers.
Maximizing Volunteer Skillsets
    The Peace Corps attracts highly talented and motivated individuals 
who want to put their skills to work to demonstrate the U.S.'s goodwill 
and generosity. It is important for the Peace Corps to address 
development needs by utilizing volunteers with most useful skillsets.

    Question 7.  How are volunteers' expertise tailored to their Peace 
Corps assignments?

    Answer. A considerable amount of work goes into matching Peace 
Corps Volunteer's skills, among other attributes, with where they will 
have the most impact while serving. A combination of Peace Corps' deep 
understanding of the development needs of host countries, targeted 
recruiting, knowledge of priorities at the community level, programming 
and training play critical roles in the agency's unique ability to 
precisely match volunteers with work assignments.

    Question 8.  What efforts does the Peace Corps make to recruit 
volunteers with specific skills sets based on specific country needs?

    Answer. Peace Corps' Office of Volunteer Recruitment and Selection 
works to recruit potential applicants who possess the skills that host 
countries have identified are necessary to complete specific projects. 
Peace Corps incorporates this information into its annual recruitment 
strategy and implementation plan. Peace Corps also has the ability to 
modify its recruitment outreach to adapt to new requests.

    Question 9.  Understanding that the Peace Corps provides volunteers 
based on proposed needs as determined by host countries, what influence 
or advice does the Peace Corps provide to host countries on accepting 
volunteers with specific expertise that could help address specialized 
needs in certain communities?

    Answer. Peace Corps Country Directors and program staff maintain 
close working relationships with host country governments and partner 
agencies and are deeply versed in with the development needs in 
countries where the agency operates. Peace Corps works within the 
parameters of six program sectors: education; health; community and 
economic development; agriculture; youth; and environment, and places 
volunteers in sites according to community need and technical 
skillsets.

    Question 10.  Do you believe it to be appropriate for the Peace 
Corps to advise host countries on their development needs?

    Answer. Peace Corps does not advise host countries on their 
development or other needs. Rather, the agency works closely with 
stakeholders in the above mentioned six programming sectors to 
determine where Peace Corps volunteers can best help countries meet 
their development needs.
Opening and Terminating Peace Corps Missions
    During your tenure as Acting Director the Peace Corps you opened 
several new missions.

    Question 11.  What is the operational status of the missions you 
opened during your time as Acting Director of the Peace Corps?

    Answer. During my time as Acting Director, Peace Corps did not open 
any new posts.

    Question 12.  Do you intend, or want, to open new Peace Corps 
missions?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will conduct a full country portfolio 
review to both make certain that Peace Corps is sending volunteers to 
interested countries where they are most needed and where they stand 
poised to achieve greatest impact.

    Question 13.  If so, how would you allocate resources, based on the 
President's FY 19 Budget request for Peace Corps that represents a 3.4 
percent reduction from FY 17 enacted amounts, to make this possible?

    Answer. The country portfolio review will ensure that Peace Corp 
volunteers are working in countries where they are delivering the best 
return on investment for American taxpayers.

    Question 14.  In any instance where the Peace Corps finds it needs 
to terminate missions, will you commit to informing Congress about 
these decisions and to the development and execution of a strategic and 
gradual process to ending missions?

    Answer. Yes, I will most certainly inform Congress.
Diversity
    Research from private industry demonstrates that, when managed 
well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of creativity 
and productivity.

    Question 15.  What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors 
and managers within the Peace Corps are fostering workplaces that are 
diverse and inclusive?

    Answer. The Peace Corps actively supports a culture of inclusion 
that builds on the strengths of the diversity of America and of the 
countries where volunteers serve. I will work to ensure that the agency 
continues to reflect the population of the United States.

    Question 16.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in 
the Peace Corps?

    Answer. Increasing the number of minority Volunteer applicants was 
an objective of the agency's 2014-2018 strategic plan. Since then, the 
agency has achieved its goal of increasing the number to 35 percent. If 
confirmed, I will continue to work to strengthen diversity and 
inclusion across the agency.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
           Hon. Josephine Olsen by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

Human Rights
    Question 1.  What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. Since taking my oath as a Volunteer, I have been committed 
to upholding Peace Corps' mission and three goals. As the director of 
the University of Maryland, Baltimore Center for Global Education 
Initiatives, I taught international social work, global social policy, 
and issues in global women's and children's health. As I stated in my 
confirmation hearing, my passion is supporting the Peace Corps mission 
to work directly with disadvantaged populations overseas and better the 
lives of individuals in the communities and countries where its 
volunteers serve.
Sexual Assault
    Question 2.  What additional work is necessary to advance Peace 
Corps' Sexual Assault, Risk Reduction, and Response Program?

    Answer. Peace Corps can continue to be more proactive in providing 
information about sexual assault prevention and awareness to 
volunteers, staff, and counterparts. The agency can continue to advance 
the impressive work of its Sexual Assault Risk Reduction and Response 
Program (SARRR) and Office of Victim Advocacy (OVA) by continually 
evaluating the impact of its efforts and making necessary improvements 
accordingly.

    Question 3.  How will you approach redefining the Peace Corps 
culture to be a trauma-informed organization, specifically as it 
relates to sexual assault?

    Answer. I believe the Peace Corps is committed to continuing its 
evolution as a trauma-informed agency. It is my understanding that 
SARRR and OVA staff have the expertise to and are delivering trauma-
informed care at both individual and systems levels. If confirmed, I 
will support the agency's endeavors to use this lens in all aspects of 
the program, from policy development to training to individual victim 
response.

    Question 4.  Understanding that you are committed to establishing a 
culture of safety within the Peace Corps, how should the Peace Corps 
pond to Peace Corps Volunteer reports of living or working in hostile 
environments where they are experiencing physical, mental, or sexual 
abuse or harassment?

    Answer. There is no higher priority for the Peace Corps than the 
safety and security of its volunteers. I am fully committed to working 
to ensure that the agency further upgrades and implements 
comprehensive, Volunteer-centered policies for safety and security, 
including thorough procedures to train and guide staff who respond to 
harassment or abuse reports. I will work to ensure that volunteers have 
the training and information they need to report all types of safety 
and security violations, and staff have the resources they need to 
respond.
Diversity
    Question 5.  While the Peace Corps has done an admirable job to 
improve the diversity of its recruits, including increasing recruitment 
at Historically Black Colleges and Universities, what steps do you 
think the Peace Corps must take to reduce attrition the among get 
accepted recruits who ultimately decide not to take their Peace Corps 
assignment?

    Answer. The agency can continue to advance efforts to strengthen 
its culture of inclusion and openness in fielding and supporting a 
Volunteer corps that reflects the rich diversity of our country. This 
includes the integration of comprehensive intercultural competence, 
diversity, and inclusion, as noted in the agency's 2018-2022 Strategic 
Plan. In addition, the agency can take proactive steps to reduce 
minority attrition rates by providing personal attention to and 
comprehensive information to interested candidates about the long-term 
benefits of Volunteer service, including the competitive career skills 
they can develop while serving as a Volunteer. Peace Corps can also 
provide more support and services to returned Peace Corps volunteers to 
help them prepare for jobs in multiple fields and sectors, tapping into 
the network of more than a quarter million returned volunteers.

    Question 6.  What do you believe are the barriers most accepted 
volunteers who opt out of accepting an volunteer assignment, or drop 
out somewhere along the application and acceptance process, and what 
should the Peace Corps do to alleviate these barriers of entry into the 
Peace Corps?

    Answer. More research and analysis remains to be done. However, 
often accepted candidates withdraw because of personal reasons, 
alternative job opportunities, presumed costs associated with service, 
and health and safety concerns. Peace Corps can always take more action 
to help ensure Americans from all backgrounds are able to serve. If 
confirmed, I commit to working with you, your staff, and other Members 
of Congress to find solutions to the barriers that impact accepted 
applicants' decision to withdraw.

    Question 7.  If confirmed, will you condemn and oppose policies and 
practices that are derogatory and discriminatory on the basis of race, 
religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity?

    Answer. Yes. I will comply with anti-discrimination laws and 
regulations to promote a professional work environment.
Care for Returned Volunteers
    Question 8.  Will you commit to working with the Department of 
Labor to improve the handling and dispensation of healthcare benefits 
to return volunteers, especially to those return volunteers who become 
disabled as a result of their service?

    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to working closely with the 
Department of Labor and other stakeholders to ensure returned Peace 
Corps volunteers who suffered a disability while serving have the 
appropriate information to file a claim with the Department of Labor. 
Additionally, I will support Peace Corps' efforts to streamline the 
filing and adjudication process. Promoting health services for Peace 
Corps volunteers and returned volunteers will be one of my priorities.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                   Erik Bethel by Senator Todd Young

    Question 1.  The U.S. Alternate Executive Director represents the 
United States Government as the largest shareholder of the World Bank. 
This individual is charged with conveying U.S. positions and priorities 
to World Bank management and other board members. In your view, from a 
U.S. perspective, should the World Bank continue to lend money to 
China? If so, what is the rationale for supporting World Bank lending 
to one of the world's largest economies and a leading strategic 
competitor of the United States?Over the last several decades, the 
geopolitical and economic landscape has changed considerably. One of 
the most visible transformations has occurred in China--a country that 
currently has the world's second-largest GDP. Given the marked changes 
in China's income and financial capacity, including ready access to 
international capital markets and domestic resources, it would be wise 
to adjust World Bank lending policies accordingly. In particular, 
China's role needs to shift from borrower to donor.

    Answer. Currently, the United States only supports lending to China 
that addresses basic human needs in the country's poorest regions, and 
if confirmed, I will continue to ensure that U.S. legislation 
concerning World Bank lending to China is followed. While the World 
Bank's high standards and knowledge can provide important benefits to 
people in the poorest regions of China, I will work to encourage the 
World Bank to do more to provide these benefits through non-lending 
activities, such as reimbursable technical assistance.

    Question 2.  What is your view on the ``graduation'' of countries 
from International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD)-
lending status? How should the World Bank consider ending its formal 
lending relationship with upper middle-income countries? How does the 
current graduation criteria apply to China?

    Answer. The World Bank should focus its resources on poorer 
countries with less access to other sources of finance, and where its 
work can have the greatest impact on growth and poverty reduction. 
Furthermore, ``graduation'' should be viewed as a status symbol that 
countries embrace, as it would indicate a successful implementation of 
sound economic policies.
    If confirmed, I will press the World Bank to more rigorously apply 
its Graduation Policy. This entails: (1) that the World Bank conduct 
in-depth and credible assessments of a given country's key institutions 
in order to understand any gaps to graduation; and (2) focus any 
activities within the countries that have crossed the income threshold 
on those remaining gaps to graduation. I will also push the World Bank 
to set a limit on the amount of overall IBRD finance that can be 
allocated to countries above the graduation income threshold, thereby 
reserving scarce development resources for the countries that need the 
most support.
    In 2016, China crossed the graduation-eligible income threshold 
(currently set at $6,895 GNI per capita for FY 2018). Once a country 
crosses this income threshold, the World Bank is expected to begin 
graduation discussions to assess a country's ability to access external 
capital markets on reasonable terms and its progress in establishing 
key institutions for economic and social development.

    Question 3.  What in your view are the strategic consequences of 
the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) for the World Bank?

    Answer. The AIIB presents both a risk and an opportunity to the 
World Bank. There are substantial infrastructure needs in Asia, and the 
AIIB can play a role in addressing this financing gap. However, these 
investments must be conducted using high standards for environmental 
and social protections as well as procurement. Furthermore AIIB-
financed projects should not place an unsustainable debt burden on the 
recipient country.
    World Bank projects follow the high standards that we view are 
essential. One method of increasing financing available for 
infrastructure while at the same time addressing the social 
environmental and governance issues mentioned above, is by allowing the 
AIIB to provide co-financing to World Bank designed and managed 
projects. This can be a means of effectively channeling the AIIB's 
financial resources in a responsible manner, while ensuring that the 
World Bank's high standards are applied.

    Question 4.  The World Bank has initiated and supported a number of 
programs in Yemen. If confirmed, will you ensure the World Bank keeps 
me and my office up to date on programs in Yemen and how we can be 
helpful?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed I will ensure that the WB keeps you and 
your office up to date on progress.

    Question 5.  Based on your preparation for this hearing and your 
experience in investment banking, would you please describe how the 
World Bank uses bonds and insurance to finance development? With 
respect to the use of bonds and insurance mechanisms to finance 
development, what lessons do you believe we can draw from the World 
Bank's experience with U.S. foreign assistance? If confirmed, will you 
ensure the World Bank keeps me and my office up to date on these and 
other innovations for financing development?

    Answer. The principal means by which the World Bank uses bonds to 
finance development is by using its triple-A credit rating to leverage 
shareholder equity by up to five times in international capital markets 
and using the proceeds for lending to developing countries. The 
Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (MIGA) is the World Bank's 
chief provider of investment guarantees and political risk insurance 
for non-commercial risk.
    As you note, however, the World Bank has also increasingly been 
using innovative financial products to spur growth and support public 
and private sector development. Several examples include: (1) the use 
of catastrophe bonds to help Mexico and several Latin American 
countries to protect against fiscal and macroeconomic impacts of 
natural disasters; and (2) the Pandemic Emergency Facility managed by 
the World Bank that uses financing from Germany and Japan to provide 
insurance for low-income countries in the event of an outbreak of a 
virus. These examples indicate the potential for using foreign 
assistance to catalyze private and donor finance, though many of these 
innovations are relatively new and the models are untested.
    If confirmed, I will work to keep you up to date on the World 
Bank's use of innovative financing for development purposes.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Sean Cairncross by Senator Robert Menendez

Anti-Muslim Policies
    Indonesia is the recipient of the largest MCC compact, and has the 
largest Muslim population in the world.

    Question 1.  How do you feel then-candidate Trump's call for ``a 
total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States'' in 
December of 2015 and Executive Orders 13769 and 13780 effects the U.S. 
Government and MCC's work in Indonesia and other countries with large 
Muslim populations?

    Answer. The MCC compact in Indonesia closes out in April of this 
year, and my understanding is that it has been largely very successful. 
In particular, I understand that the nutritional anti-stunting 
components and the procurement modernization components of the compact 
have and will continue to yield positive results. I am unaware of any 
affects that the above-referenced comments or executive order have had 
concerning the Indonesian compact or compacts in any other MCC 
countries.
    I believe that MCC is an excellent representative of the U.S. 
Government's foreign engagement efforts--providing hundreds of millions 
of U.S. taxpayer dollars on concrete projects in partner countries to 
reduce poverty through economic growth. If confirmed, I intend to 
continue MCC's track-record of helping foreign nations build their 
capacity for sustainable economic growth.

    Question 2.  What is your personal opinion of then-candidate 
Trump's statement and of EO 13769

    Answer. With respect to the above referenced comments, I do not 
support such a shutdown. With respect to the above referenced EO, I 
defer to experts in homeland security with respect to travel security 
matters.

White House Role
    You have worked closely with the chiefs of staff of the White House 
going back to the presidential transition immediately following the 
November 2016 presidential elections.

    Question 3.  What was the scope of your responsibilities as the 
senior advisor to White House Chief of Staff Reince Priebus beginning 
in January 2017?

    Answer. I assisted Mr. Priebus in attempting to coordinate 
activities of various White House components, and served as Mr. 
Priebus's proxy on the Deputies and Principals committees of the 
National Security Council.

    Question 4.  Did your responsibilities change when General John 
Kelly assumed the position of White House Chief of Staff?

    Answer. Yes; I no longer attended National Security Council 
meetings, including those meetings referenced in response to (a) above.

    Question 5.  What was, or is currently, your role in hiring White 
House staff, or in setting or implementing the White House's security 
clearance policy?

    Answer. At no time have I had a role in hiring White House staff or 
in setting or implementing the White House security clearance policy.

    Question 6.  As senior advisor to the White House chief of staff, 
were you aware that senior White House staff, including Rob Porter and 
Jared Kushner, had not been granted permanent security clearances as of 
the end of 2017?

    Answer. No.

    Question 7.  What discussion have you had with Reince Priebus or 
John Kelly about the inability of senior White House staff needing 
access to highly-classified information, but being unable to obtain 
permanent security clearances?

    Answer. I have not discussed this matter with either Mr. Priebus or 
General Kelly.

    Question 8.  What was the nature of your discussions or advice on 
these matters?

    Answer. I have not discussed this matter with either Mr. Priebus or 
General Kelly.

    Question 9.  Through your work within the White House, were you 
aware of the spousal abuse allegations against former staff secretary 
Rob Porter?

    Answer. No.

    Question 10.  Did you ever discuss those allegations with Reince 
Priebus, John Kelly, or any other White House staff?

    Answer. No.

    Question 11.  If aware, were you concerned about those allegations?

    Answer. [not applicable].

    Question 12.  Do you believe the White House has handled the manner 
properly?

    Answer. I believe it appropriate that Mr. Porter no longer works at 
the White House, and that steps have been taken to improve the security 
clearance process.
Public Statements on Acorn as a Political Spokesperson
    You have spent most of your career as political operative within 
the RNC, including serving as a spokesperson for the RNC and for 
Republican candidates. In 2008, in a report produced by NPR, you stated 
that ACORN, an organization that worked to register voters in minority 
neighborhoods, was ``a quasi-criminal, Democrat-affiliated organization 
that willfully and openly breaks the law, is a clear and present danger 
to the integrity of the election process, and constitutes a threat to 
public safety.'' Furthermore, you once stated that ACORN's filing of 
lawsuits alleging voter suppression was ``an abomination that attempts 
to subvert the very foundation on which America stand.''

    Question 13.  Do you still hold the opinion that ACORN is ``a 
quasi-criminal, Democrat-affiliated organization that willfully and 
openly breaks the law, is a clear and present danger to the integrity 
of the election process, and constitutes a threat to public safety?''

    Answer. I no longer believe that ACORN is any of the above.

    Question 14.  If so, would you please qualify these beliefs?

    Answer. [not applicable].

    Question 15.  Why do you believe that appealing to the U.S. court 
system about perceived election irregularities constitutes ``an 
abomination''?

    Answer. I do not recall the specifics of this particular matter; 
however, I do not believe that a legitimate lawsuit to fight voter 
suppression is a negative.

    Public Statements on Voter Fraud as a Political Spokesperson: You 
once defended a Republican campaign direct mailing that went out to 
elderly voters in Florida with a ``voter registration tracking form'' 
which listed their affiliation as ``unconfirmed.'' You said that the 
mailer was ``a fundraising gimmick'' that was sent to an internal 
mailing list. Yet, according to the St. Petersburg Times, the mailer 
went to numerous life-long Democrats, and Florida's Republican 
Secretary of State ``called the mailing `unfortunate' because of its 
potential to make some voters question the validity of their 
registration.''

    Question 16.  Do you agree with Florida's then-Secretary of State 
that telling elderly voters that their voter registration is 
``unconfirmed'' could lead to confusion regarding their voter 
registration status?

    Answer. I do not recall the specifics of this particular matter; 
however, if the St. Petersburg Times note referenced above is correct, 
then I do agree with Florida's then-Secretary of State.
Public Statements on Voter Suppression as a Political Spokesperson
    You once stated that a Democratic campaign flyer alleging vote 
suppression by Republican entities ``creates uncertainty and fear among 
the voting public, which itself amounts to nothing less than vote 
suppression.''

    Question 17.  In your opinion, how is providing information warning 
about potential vote suppression is equivalent to vote suppression?

    Answer. I do not recall the specifics of this particular matter; 
however, I do not believe that a legitimate notice concerning voter 
suppression is a negative
Defendant in a Racial Discrimination Case
    You were a defendant in a civil action in 2010 against the National 
Republican Senatorial committee (NSRC) that alleged discrimination 
based on race and a hostile work environment based on race. According 
to the plaintiff's complaint, you berated the plaintiff after being 
told by your assistant that he had not ``hopped to'' when instructed to 
clean up trash after an event, which was not in his scope of duties, 
telling him that ``if he did not straighten up, he would lose his 
home.'' In your meeting with committee staff, you said that you 
terminated the defendant because of complaints from female employees 
and problems with the defendant's honesty. The defendant had worked at 
the NSRC for 15 years before you terminated him.

    Question 18.  Do you maintain the plaintiff's allegation to be 
false?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 19.  Were similar complaints submitted during those 15 
years or did they only surface after your arrival at the NSRC?

    Answer. There had been at least one incident before 2009 of which 
we became aware.

    Question 20.  If the latter, do you have an explanation for why the 
employee's behavior only attracted complaints after you began working 
at the NSRC?

    Answer. [No Response.]

    Question 21.  Have there ever been any other workplace-related 
complaints against you or any employees under your supervision? If so, 
how were these complaints resolved?

    Answer. No.

    Question 22.  Do you commit to ensuring an open and fair workplace, 
free from hostility and discrimination?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 23.  Can you provide examples from your past management 
experience when you have created and helped maintain such an open 
workplace?

    Answer. I have required personnel to take anti-harassment and anti-
discrimination training in past organizations. I have regularly 
encouraged employees to raise any workplace issues with their 
supervisors, designated point people, and other agency leaders, and, 
during my time as counsel to organizations, I would regularly meet with 
personnel at all levels to ensure that the workplace environment was 
healthy.
    I have also written, reviewed, and updated organizational policies 
and the procedural methods for dealing with potential workplace issues.
Robert Blau
    On February 26, I sent a letter to the Acting MCC CEO which raised 
my concerns about MCC's Vice President, Department of Compact 
Operations, Robert Blau. As you know, Mr. Blau made several troubling 
comments during an all-hands meeting last June, comments which 
reportedly left MCC's dedicated and professional staff shaken and 
disturbed. During the meeting, Mr. Blau made comments that raise 
questions about his approach to and treatment of employees based on 
their political leanings, sexual orientation, and national origin. 
Furthermore, in the over eight months since the meeting, Mr. Blau has 
reportedly made repeated inappropriate remarks to staff, including 
inquiries about employees' ethnic backgrounds, with an apparent focus 
on minorities, and expressed his discomfort with promoting diversity.

    Question 24.  Do you agree that Mr. Blau's comments were 
inappropriate and offensive to MCC employees?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 25.  If reports that MCC staff have filed several 
complaints against Mr. Blau because of his comments with regards to 
race, gender, and diversity are confirmed, do you commit to review all 
complaints made against Mr. Blau?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 26.  If so, and you find upon review of the complaints 
that Mr. Blau's behavior has reflected poorly on the MCC's reputation 
for professionalism and has been detrimental to the morale of MCC 
employees, will you take appropriate action including, if necessary, 
terminating Mr. Blau's employment at the MCC?

    Answer. If so, yes.
Public Comments made About Sen. McCaskill
    In 2012 you said of Senator Claire McCaskill that her ``sense of 
entitlement is troubling'' and that ``it seems Senator McCaskill 
doesn't believe the rules apply to her.'' And in 2011 you said that a 
revision to her FEC report ``calls into question the fact whether you 
can believe what she says.''

    Question 27.  Do you still hold these opinions of Senator 
McCaskill?

    Answer. I do not. I believe that during the 2012 cycle Senator 
McCaskill made a public and good faith effort to appropriately address 
any such 2012 cycle issues.
Diversity and Combatting Hostile Work Environments
    Research from private industry demonstrates that, when managed 
well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of creativity 
and productivity.

    Question 28.  What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors 
and managers within MCC are fostering an environment that's diverse and 
inclusive?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will set a tone from the top of the agency 
that diversity is critical to effective work and highly valued, 
enriches the work environment, and leads to better decision making. 
Among other things, I will participate in diversity and inclusion 
refresher training sessions and will require that all senior leadership 
participate along with me.

    Question 29.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups at 
the MCC?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will support such staff--and promote their 
inclusion throughout the various MCC decision making processes.

    Question 30.  As a possible official of the Trump administration, 
will you condemn and oppose policies and practices that are derogatory 
and discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, 
sexual orientation, or gender identity?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 31.  What will you do to ensure that statements by the 
Trump campaign and transition teams that are racist, xenophobic, 
misogynistic, or otherwise denigrate human rights and support abuses, 
will not become government policy?

    Answer. If confirmed I intend to keep MCC focused on its mission of 
reducing poverty through economic growth in the poorest, best governed 
countries in the world.

    Question 32.  Will you uphold the rights of all persons to equality 
and freedom from discrimination, and call on Americans to refrain from 
discrimination of any sort?

    Answer. Yes.
Mr. Robert Blau
    It is my understanding that many of the complaints about Mr. Blau's 
comments have not been reported through the MCC ethics office or other 
formal channels, but were relayed verbally to senior staff, who then 
discussed them with Mr. Blau in person. These complaints were also not 
included in Mr. Blau's performance evaluation. As such, there is 
apparently no written record cataloguing the number and nature of the 
alleged inappropriate and offensive comments that Mr. Blau has made to 
MCC staff over the past nine months.
    Question 33.  Given the lack of an official record of staff 
complaints, please explain any proactive steps you plan to take to 
collect, review, and evaluate concerns about Mr. Blau's comments and 
behavior.If confirmed, I have committed to further review of any and 
all complaints made against Robert Blau, verbal or written, and that I 
will take all appropriate steps to address this matter. This includes 
conversations with management and staff to fully understand the context 
and concerns; as well as a conversation with Robert Blau. If confirmed, 
I commit to working with the team at MCC in this review process.
Elliot Broidy
    Question 34.  During your recent tenure at the Republican National 
committee (RNC), did you work in any capacity with Elliot Broidy, who 
then served as vice chairman of the Trump Victory Fund, a joint 
fundraising committee between the Trump campaign and the RNC? If so, 
please describe the nature and extent of your interactions and 
communications with Mr. Broidy.

    Answer. I did not work with Mr. Broidy during the 2016 election 
cycle.

    Question 35.  During your time in the White House, did you ever 
attend any meetings with Mr. Broidy or arrange any meetings between Mr. 
Broidy and other White House personnel? If so, please describe the 
nature of these meetings, including the date, who attended, and what 
was discussed.

    Answer. No.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Sean Cairncross by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

Human Rights
    Question 1.  What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. While protection of human rights and democracy are very 
important to me personally, they have not been a particular emphasis of 
my professional career to date. If confirmed, I look forward to 
promotion of these core beliefs as CEO of MCC.

    Question 2.  What are the most pressing human rights concerns in 
MCC compact and threshold countries? What are the most important steps 
you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy 
in those countries? What do you hope to accomplish through these 
actions?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to maintain and further 
strengthen MCC's commitment to partnering only with countries committed 
to just and democratic governance and to controlling corruption. The 
scorecard remains a clear hurdle for countries to meet in order to be 
considered for compact selection. The Democratic Rights and Control of 
Corruption `hard hurdles' provide a strong screening mechanism as well.
    That said, there is room for growth in many, if not all, of MCC 
compact and threshold countries which is why MCC countries are held to 
a clear standard throughout the life-cycle of a compact and must 
maintain their eligibility at all times. MCC can and has suspended or 
terminated assistance to countries that have failed to maintain their 
commitment to good governance and, if confirmed, I will ensure that MCC 
continues to do so.

    Question 3.  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 MCC compact and 
threshold countries advancing human rights, civil society and democracy 
in general?

    Answer. As mentioned above, there is room for improvement on human 
rights, civil society, and democracy in many, if not all, of MCC 
compact and threshold countries. Often policy and institutional reforms 
can take time to come to fruition, particularly in developing countries 
and nascent democracies. I believe MCC maintains tremendous leverage in 
partner countries to incentivize advancements in these key areas and to 
hold partners to a high standard throughout the development and 
implementation of compact or threshold program. MCC's leverage stems 
not only from the specific program, but MCC's ability to serve as a 
bridge to the private sector, further mobilizing capital and bringing 
resources to bear. Finally, as previously mentioned, MCC can and has 
suspended or terminated assistance to countries that have failed to 
maintain their commitment to good governance which increases the 
agency's leverage.

    Question 4.  Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in MCC compact and threshold countries?

    Answer. Yes.
Leadership Vision
    Question 5.  What is your vision for advancing MCC as a leading 
economic development agency?

    Answer. I intend to maintain MCC's record of data-driven, 
transparent, and mission focused model and seek to broaden MCC's 
engagement with (1) other U.S. Government agencies; and (2) private-
sector parties to maximize MCC impact in partner countries.
    I also intend to leverage the incentive power that MCC has in 
attempting to achieve concrete policy results both before eligibility 
selection and also during the compact development and implementation 
phases.

    Question 6.  Aside from authorization of concurrent and subnational 
compacts, what do you see as the top policy reforms necessary to 
enhance MCC's reach? With the rise of more middle income countries in 
the developing world, the world's poor will be increasingly located in 
countries outside MCC's current focus. How might the MCC respond to 
this changing face of global poverty?

    Answer. If confirmed, I intend to look for new ways to leverage 
MCC's presence in developing countries through enhanced partnerships 
and engagement with the private sector. I also see room for further 
collaboration with OPIC and potentially a new International Development 
Finance Corporation, if enacted.
    Finally, I understand MCC has done considerable analysis about the 
agency's country candidate pool and I look forward to reviewing in 
depth and consult further with stakeholders, if confirmed, before 
determining the best course of action and specific policy proposals.

    Question 7.  What is your vision for the Threshold program?

    Answer. While I look forward, if confirmed, to delving into the 
details of the threshold program and possible next steps, I believe 
that the threshold program currently is an important tool to 
incentivize and achieve concrete policy and institutional reforms that 
improve the investment climate and fight corruption. Threshold programs 
can help a country become eligible for a compact and is an important 
tool for MCC to gain a sense of a potential compact country's true 
commitment to achieving sustainable economic growth.
Evaluation and Accountability
    Question 8.  What are your priorities as they relate to furthering 
the agency's leadership on transparency and evidence-based decision-
making?

    Answer. I intend to keep MCC at the leading edge of transparent 
assistance organizations. Transparency builds capacity within partner 
countries and builds confidence domestically that U.S. tax dollars are 
being used as efficiently and effectively as possible, and ultimately 
helps make the case for U.S. foreign engagement.

    Question 9.  In the State of Union, President Trump called on 
``Congress to pass legislation to help ensure American foreign 
Assistance dollars always serve American interests, and only go to our 
friends''. What will you do to ensure that MCC realizes this statement 
and ensures that foreign assistance provided by MCC ``only go to our 
friends''? What guidance has MCC received from the White House on 
executing the President's call to ``ensure American foreign Assistance 
dollars always serve American interests, and only go to our friends''?

    Answer. I intend to maintain MCC's objective selection criteria and 
model. I believe that U.S. strategic interests do not dictate where MCC 
engages, but where MCC does engage its actions buttress and support 
U.S. strategic interests. Moreover, MCC's work in the world's best 
governed poorest nations will hopefully lead to more allies and 
strategic partnerships.
Diversity
    Question 10.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups?

    Answer. First, I will support such staff--and promote their 
inclusion throughout the various MCC decision making processes. I will 
make clear to staff and stakeholders that I value diversity--as I did 
during my recent testimony to this committee.
    Second, I will seek to hire from as broad a pool of potential 
applicants as possible--including internal and external MCC 
candidates-- in order to increase both female and minority staff 
members at MCC. I will ensure that this goal is communicated to 
department and division leadership with hiring authority.

    Question 11.  What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors at the MCC are fostering an environment that is diverse and 
inclusive?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will set a tone from the top of the agency 
that diversity is critical to effective work and highly valued, 
enriches the work environment, and leads to better decision making. 
Among other things, I will participate in diversity and inclusion 
refresher training sessions and will require that all senior leadership 
participate along with me.

    Question 12. If confirmed, will you condemn and oppose policies and 
practices at MCC that are derogatory and discriminatory on the basis of 
race, religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, or gender 
identity?

    Answer. Yes.
Conflicts of Interest
    Question 13.  Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 14.  Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 15.  Do you or do any members of your immediate family 
have any financial interests in MCC compact and threshold countries?

    Answer. No.
Host Country Ownership

    MCC's model puts country constraints, priorities, and systems at 
the center of its work--leading to greater sustainability of 
development gains over time.

    Question 16.  How would you deepen the MCC's approach to country 
ownership and sustainability of impact at the agency?

    Answer. I believe that partner country financial commitment, such 
as Nepal contributing $130 million to their compact program, is an 
important demonstration of country ownership. I would seek to grow 
partner country resource mobilization.
    Also important is making sure that there is a strong process to 
gain civil society buy-in during the development phase which I intend 
to maintain and look for ways to improve.

    Question 17.  How might you better ensure that countries are able 
to build on MCC's legacy and continue the oversight, management, 
funding, monitoring, and evaluation of programs after MCC leaves?

    Answer. One of MCC's lasting legacies is the transfer of knowledge 
and the processes through which a successful project is run: open 
procurement; appropriate taxation; maintenance funds, etc. Much of this 
is instituted through the country ``Accountable Entities''--referred to 
as MCAs. I believe that working with host governments to gain a 
commitment to preserving the MCA best practices beyond the life of the 
compact is important to continuing the oversight, management, funding, 
monitoring, and evaluation of MCC projects post close-out date.

    Question 18.  What role do you believe host countries and local 
partners, that MCC works with, should play determining development 
projects and goals that involve MCC?

    Answer. Host country leadership in identifying economic constraints 
and targeting constraints has been a vital component of MCC's success 
to date. While this must continue, MCC should fully engage to ensure 
that the process moves forward expeditiously, and that delay is not 
created by an overreliance on process. Ultimately, the partner country 
must support the project to achieve sustainability.
USAID
    Question 19.  Have you discussed USAID's ``Strategic Transitions'' 
initiative with Administrator Green?

    Answer. I have not discussed Strategic Transitions with Ambassador 
Green.

    Question 20.  What role do you see MCC playing in realizing the 
aims of the ``Strategic Transitions initiative''?

    Answer. I will be happy to respond to the Senator, or the Senator's 
staff once I have discussed the matter with Ambassador Green.

    Question 21.  What is your vision for how MCC and USAID should 
engage to best leverage their individual strengths, in support of U.S. 
national interests?

    Answer. MCC's singular mission of reducing poverty through economic 
growth occupies a critical stage on a partner country's development 
arc. USAID's work at poverty alleviation and disaster relief occupy the 
front end of that arc, and MCC's engagement with a country is an 
indicator that a country has moved along that arc to the point of (1) 
attempting to embrace policies that reflect good governance, economic 
freedom, and investment in its people; and (2) targeting key 
constraints on economic growth and developing an MCC-funded investment 
that addresses those constraints with a goal of alleviating poverty. 
Conditions in countries at this critical stage still vary widely--with 
MCC engaged everywhere from Niger--one of the poorest countries in the 
world--to Georgia and Morocco.
    This also does not mean that MCC and USAID do not work in many of 
the same countries or otherwise closely coordinate programming where 
possible. Good examples of this include MCC's complementary work with 
Power Africa and PEPFAR in countries where MCC is engaged. This 
reflects an efficient model of U.S. Government assistance agencies 
working closely to avoid redundancy, stay on mission, and maximize 
impact.
    Ultimately, MCC's work should help build capacity for sustainable 
economic growth, and consolidate policy gains in a partner country. 
This supports broader U.S. strategic interests by building strategic 
partnerships and countering competing global development models that 
are being pursued, in particular from China. This dovetails with the 
administration's goals as expressed in Pillar IV--in particular 
encouraging aspiring partner countries--of the National Security 
Strategy and in the focus on global development finance that includes 
the Development Finance Initiative. While U.S. strategic interests do 
not dictate where MCC works, where MCC does work the agency supports 
and bolsters U.S. strategic interests.



                               __________


           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record 
        Submitted to Sean Cairncross by Senator Edward J. Markey

    The Honduran electoral commission in December 2017 declared 
President Juan Orlando Hern ndez winner of Honduras' presidential 
election despite widespread reports of voter irregularities. The Los 
Angeles Times January 27 reported that policy brutality and post-
election protest crackdowns by the police had not been investigated and 
on February 16, the leader of an international anti-corruption panel in 
Honduras resigned citing rising hostility from the Honduran Government. 
These reports indicate that the Honduran Government has failed to fight 
corruption or support human rights, important indicators for Honduras 
to receive U.S. assistance through the Millennium Challenge 
Corporation. Control of corruption is an especially critical indicator 
for MCC funding.

    Question 1.  How will you ensure that government's that fail to 
respect human rights and appear hostile to tackling corruption remain 
ineligible for MCC Compact funding?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will seek to maintain and further 
strengthen MCC's commitment to partnering only with countries committed 
to just and democratic governance and to controlling corruption. The 
scorecard remains a clear hurdle for countries to meet in order to be 
considered for compact selection. The Democratic Rights and Control of 
Corruption `hard hurdles' provide a strong screening mechanism to help 
ensure that the types of countries you describe in your question do not 
receive MCC compact funding. In addition, countries are held to a clear 
standard throughout the life-cycle of a compact and must maintain their 
eligibility at all times. MCC can and has suspended or terminated 
assistance to countries that have failed to maintain their commitment 
to good governance and, if confirmed, I will ensure that MCC continues 
to do so.

    Question 2.  Are there mechanisms to evaluate Threshold funding to 
ensure that U.S. assistance is not being used by governments to oppress 
their people? What internal controls are in place to ensure that U.S. 
funding, given the MCC model, is not diverted through corrupt means?

    Answer. Threshold programs incorporate numerous accountability 
mechanisms to ensure that U.S. assistance is tied to results and is 
only used only for its intended purposes. These mechanisms include 
establishing a special implementation unit, known as an accountable 
entity, through which technical assistance and other goods and services 
are competitively procured and paid for only when strict policies and 
procedures are met. Accountable entities prepare anti-fraud and 
corruption plans to adhere to and their financial statements are 
audited by third-party firms. MCC also provides its own regular 
oversight of program results and in certain cases can withhold funding 
if conditions related to reform objectives are not met.
    In addition to both financial controls within the Threshold program 
and an evaluation of a country's Control of Corruption score on MCC's 
scorecard, MCC maintains a strong eligibility monitoring program 
whereby country actions with respect to political rights, civil 
liberties, and control of corruption are closely tracked. Should a 
country engage in a pattern of actions inconsistent with MCC's 
eligibility criteria, I would not hesitate to recommend a suspension or 
termination of assistance to that country.

    Question 3.  Is the scorecard an adequate predictor of a country's 
ability to successfully implement development projects?

    Answer. I believe the scorecard is a strong tool for assisting MCC 
in identifying countries with policy environments that will allow MCC's 
funding to be effective in reducing poverty and promoting economic 
growth. MCC evaluates performance in three areas-Ruling Justly, 
Investing in People, and Encouraging Economic Freedom-using 
independent, third-party policy indicators.
    In particular, the `hard hurdles' on Democratic Rights and Control 
of Corruption help monitor whether the countries MCC partners with are 
ensuring freedom of expression, the rule of law, and open political 
participation for all, as well as whether public officials are using 
public office for private gain. This wealth of information is 
invaluable to MCC as it evaluates countries during the annual selection 
process.
    It is important to note that while the scorecard is an important 
component of MCC's selection process, it is not the only component. My 
understanding is that the Board relies on a full suite of `supplemental 
information' that provides further context and information on the 
suitability of potential compact partners.
    No single tool will ever be a perfect predictor of future success, 
and the scorecard is no exception to that. However, it remains a 
powerful tool and one that has played an important role in helping MCC 
achieve its impressive track record.



                               __________


           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record 
          Submitted to Sean Cairncross by Senator Jeff Merkley

    Question 1.  What do you see as the development goals of this 
administration? Where does MCC fit in with USAID and the broader 
development goals of this administration?

    Answer. MCC's singular mission of reducing poverty through economic 
growth occupies a critical stage on a partner country's development 
arc. USAID's work at poverty alleviation and disaster relief occupy the 
front end of that arc, and MCC's engagement with a country is an 
indicator that a country has moved along that arc to the point of (1) 
attempting to embrace policies that reflect good governance, economic 
freedom, and investment in its people; and (2) targeting key 
constraints on economic growth and developing an MCC-funded investment 
that addresses those constraints with a goal of alleviating poverty. 
Conditions in countries at this critical stage still vary widely--with 
MCC engaged everywhere from Niger--one of the poorest countries in the 
world--to Georgia and Morocco.
    This also does not mean that MCC and USAID do not work in many of 
the same countries or otherwise closely coordinate programming where 
possible. Good examples of this include MCC's complementary work with 
Power Africa and PEPFAR in countries where MCC is engaged. This 
reflects an efficient model of U.S. Government assistance agencies 
working closely to avoid redundancy, stay on mission, and maximize 
impact.
    Ultimately, MCC's work should help build capacity for sustainable 
economic growth and consolidate policy gains in a partner country. This 
supports broader U.S. strategic interests by building strategic 
partnerships and countering competing global development models that 
are being pursued, in particular from China. This dovetails with the 
administration's goals as expressed in Pillar IV--in particular 
encouraging aspiring partner countries--of the National Security 
Strategy and in the focus on global development finance that includes 
the Development Finance Initiative. While U.S. strategic interests do 
not dictate where MCC works, MCC supports and bolsters U.S. strategic 
interests where it does work.

    Question 2.  This administration has been reluctant to criticize 
foreign leaders for human rights and democracy issues. Will this impact 
the range of countries the MCC is willing to do business with?

    Answer. In order for a country to be eligible for MCC engagement, 
they must first pass the MCC scorecard and then be selected by the MCC 
board of directors as eligible to develop a program. The MCC's 
scorecard indicators are objective third-party indicators that include 
a ``hard hurdle'' democratic rights indicator. This indicator consists 
of a civil liberties and political rights indicators, and is designed 
to take into account human rights and democracy issues.

    Question 3.  As Senator Menendez raised in his letter of February 
23 to Jonathan Nash, Acting MCC CEO, there are reports that a senior 
Trump administration MCC appointee (Mr. Blau) has made employees 
uncomfortable by taking hostile stances towards diversity--including 
using language diminishing efforts to ensure fair workplace 
representation and treatment of ethnic minorities, LGBTQ, and women. If 
confirmed how, specifically, would you address this issue?

    Answer. I will conduct an appropriate review to make certain I know 
the facts. I will make clear to both the individual in question and to 
all MCC staff that I find such language unacceptable. I will take all 
appropriate steps to address the matter.

    Question 4.  You said during the hearing that you value diversity 
and believe that it makes for a stronger workplace. As the leader of 
the MCC what specific steps would you take to ensure that diversity is 
highly valued within the organization? What oversight and metrics would 
you seek to consult to ensure that conscious and unconscious bias is 
being adequately addressed?

    Answer. First, I will make clear to staff and stakeholders that I 
value diversity--as I did during my recent testimony to this committee. 
Second, I will seek to hire from as broad a pool of potential 
applicants as possible--including internal and external MCC 
candidates--in order to increase both female and minority staff members 
at MCC. I will ensure that this goal is communicated to department and 
division leadership with hiring authority. Finally, I will review MCC's 
overall hiring process to ensure it is focused on and equipped to 
realize this goal.



                               __________


           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record 
         Submitted to Sean Cairncross by Senator Cory A. Booker

MCC in Africa
    As Ranking Member of the Africa subcommittee of the SFRC, I am 
pleased to see that the MCC has developed compacts with 17 sub-Saharan 
African countries in the last 14 years.

    Question 1.  Can you discuss the potential MCC Threshold Programs 
in Africa and how you see them as a gateway to a full compact?

    Answer. Threshold programs provide countries with a potential 
gateway to a compact by advancing policy reforms and strengthening 
institutions to address the most binding constraints to economic 
growth. Threshold programs complement the ``MCC Effect'' created by the 
scorecard and allow MCC to assess the opportunity for an impactful and 
cost-effective partnership before committing to a larger compact.
    I have met with the Selection and Eligibility team at MCC and I 
know they are actively monitoring developments across the continent to 
identify potential new Threshold Programs. If confirmed, I will look 
forward to identifying potential new Threshold Program partners for 
MCC's Board to consider during the FY 19 country selection process
    My understanding is that MCC is currently working with three 
African countries through its Threshold Program--Sierra Leone, Togo, 
and The Gambia. The $44 million threshold program with Sierra Leone is 
creating the foundation for more effective and financially sustainable 
provision of critical water and electricity services. A program with 
Togo to address critical constraints in ICT and land tenure is pending 
board approval. In December 2017, MCC selected The Gambia for a 
threshold program, recognizing the watershed moment for democracy in 
that country.
MCC in Niger
    I am particularly interested in the MCC Compact with Niger, 
especially because I believe we are overly relying on our DoD presence 
to bring stability in Niger without an overarching political strategy 
to stabilize the Sahel, provide for sustainable livelihoods, and 
empower civilian leaders.

    Question 2.  Can you tell me more about MCC compact in Niger and 
how you hope it contributes to a more stable Sahel?

    Answer. In July 2016, MCC signed a $437 million compact with Niger 
focused on strengthening the agricultural sector. My understanding is 
that MCC is working with the Government of Niger to rehabilitate and 
develop irrigation systems to increase crop yields, promote sustainable 
livestock and improve market access for farmers. In addition, the 
compact will help establish a national water resource management plan 
and natural resource and land use management plans, and build local 
capacity. In Niger, the agricultural sector employs more than 80 
percent of the population so MCC's compact is aimed at increasing 
revenues for mainly small-scale farmers and creating jobs. These 
economic opportunities are expected to support stability through 
sustainable livelihoods and build capacity for local communities.

    Question 3.  Is Niger's 2017 downgrading on Freedom House's 
``political rights'' index expected to affect Niger's MCC eligibility 
or compact implementation?

    Answer. While Niger's performance on the FY 18 scorecard has not 
changed Niger's current eligibility status, I understand that MCC 
communicated clearly to the Government of Niger that it was concerned 
about the three-point decline in Niger's Political Rights score, even 
though Niger continues to pass the scorecard. Passing the scorecard is 
a necessary, but not sufficient, condition of MCC eligibility. If 
confirmed, I will ensure that MCC continues to closely monitor 
political rights in Niger.

    Question 4.  How, if confirmed, will you advise U.S. diplomatic 
messaging to leverage MCC investments in order to prevent more 
democratic backsliding in Niger?

    Answer. During compact development and during the current 
implementation stage, I understand that MCC has closely coordinated 
with the U.S. Embassy in Niamey and with other USG agencies active in 
Niger. They remain in sync on messaging, as MCC does in all partner 
countries. During compact implementation in any country, MCC continues 
to monitor a partner country's performance in various areas, including 
democratic governance and consistently messages that progress on 
implementation must be accompanied by strong policy performance.
    MCC's investments are always subject to countries maintaining their 
commitment to MCC's values of democratic governance, which includes 
guarantees of freedom of expression, the rule of law, and open 
political participation for all. One thing I admire about MCC is its 
willingness to suspend or terminate assistance to countries that fail 
to adhere to this commitment. If confirmed, I will advise continued 
messaging to the Government of Niger that MCC is closely monitoring 
events on the ground with a focus on the fair treatment of the 
political opposition and civil society, and on the rule of law. 
Significant further deterioration of political rights could adversely 
affect MCC's partnership with Niger.

                               __________

                              NOMINATIONS

                              ----------                              


                        THURSDAY, MARCH 1, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in 
Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Ron Johnson, 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Johnson [presiding], Gardner, and Murphy.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON JOHNSON, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM WISCONSIN

    Senator Johnson. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate 
Foreign Relations committee will come to order.
    We gather today to consider three nominations. Mr. Robert 
Pence is the President's nominee to be Ambassador to Finland. 
Dr. Judy Shelton is the nominee to be U.S. Executive Director 
of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. And 
Mr. Trevor Traina is the President's nominee to be the 
Ambassador to Austria. I want to welcome all the nominees and 
their families and friends. I want to thank all of you for your 
willingness to serve this nation. I certainly congratulate you 
for your nomination by President Trump, and I will let you 
introduce your family and friends in your opening statements.
    Before moving to those opening statements, I would also 
like to welcome our distinguished colleague from Texas, Senator 
John Cornyn, who will introduce our nominee to be Ambassador to 
Finland. Senator Cornyn?

                STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORNYN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    Senator Cornyn. Well, thank you, Chairman Johnson and 
Senator Murphy. And to members of the committee, I am honored 
to be here.
    Let me just start by congratulating all three of the 
nominees for their nomination and their willingness to serve. 
But I am especially proud to introduce Robert Pence to serve as 
the United States Ambassador to Finland.
    Bob is the founder and chairman of the board of the Pence 
Group, a development company, but he is much more than just a 
successful businessman. He is a leader whose civic engagement 
is extensive and rooted in a deeply held sense of public 
obligation. For example, Bob serves on the board of directors 
for a foundation run by the actor, Gary Sinise, that supports 
our veterans and our first responders.
    He cares deeply about education and the arts too, having 
serving on the boards at George Mason University, American 
University, and the Kennedy Center here in Washington. He has 
taught at Georgetown and Yale, and quite incredibly, he has got 
not only a law degree but multiple master's degrees in subjects 
like Italian and Renaissance literature. You might literally 
say Bob is a Renaissance man. But I do believe he is still 
working, he said, on last chapter on his Ph.D. dissertation on 
Dante.
    In short, Bob exhibits all the finest attributes of a 
diplomatic leader. He is an entrepreneur and a lawyer. He is an 
advocate, an educator, and a lifelong student of the world and 
history. He knows how to collaborate with all different types 
of people and has plenty of relevant experience that will aid 
him in this new capacity.
    Finland, as the committee knows, is an increasingly 
important country geopolitically because it shares an 800-mile 
border with Russia. It is on the front lines of Russia's 
attempts at hybrid warfare, its attempts to influence the news, 
as well as diplomacy and elections. And there is a lot we can 
learn from Finland's experience combating those sorts of 
activities.
    Further, the Helsinki Accords show that Finland has long 
been near the center of global politics both as a host of and 
participant in them, and more recently Finland assumed the 2-
year rotating chairmanship of the Arctic Council. Finland is a 
valuable partner and a close friend of the United States. We 
work together on issues like trade. In the defense context, we 
recently signed a bilateral defense cooperation agreement.
    Our relations with Finland are underpinned by our shared 
democratic values and close ties between our people. About 
700,000 Americans trace their ancestry to Finland, and 200,000 
Fins visit the United States each year. Bob, I am convinced, 
understands these connections acutely.
    In short, I am grateful to Bob and Suzy for responding to 
the call to public service and the President's offer of a 
nomination of this important position. And I am here to offer 
my unequivocal endorsement of Bob Pence as the next Ambassador 
to Finland. And I appreciate your consideration of this 
nomination.
    Senator Johnson. Well, thanks, Senator Cornyn. You are 
certainly welcome to stay, but we know you have a busy 
schedule, so you are also free to go on to your schedule.
    Finland and Austria are important benchmarks for the 
strength of transatlantic relations. Since the end of the Cold 
War, Austria and Finland have followed clear Western 
trajectories. Both are pluralistic democracies and have robust 
market economies. Both joined the European Union in 1995 where 
Austria has the sixth and Finland has the seventh highest GDP 
per capita. And both joined NATO's Partnership for Peace 
program in the mid-1990s, allowing them to develop working 
relationships with the alliance. Last year, the U.S., Finland, 
and other NATO and EU members established a center in Helsinki 
dedicated to countering cyber attacks, disinformation, and 
propaganda, which we all realize is a huge problem particularly 
in Eastern Europe.
    Austria has been a strong U.S. partner in promoting 
stability in Southeast Europe and has advocated forcefully for 
incorporating the rest of the Western Balkans into the EU.
    Austria and Finland have also supported EU sanctions on 
Russia for its actions in Ukraine despite considerable cost to 
their economies.
    Austria and Finland's clear embrace of the West is a 
testament to the strength of Western institutions and 
transatlantic solidarity.
    If confirmed as the highest representatives of the United 
States to these countries, you will both be tasked with 
maintaining and strengthening these important relationships.
    The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development was 
founded to aid the transition of former communist countries 
from planned to free market economies. Unlike other 
multinational development banks, it is tasked with promoting 
private sector development in countries that are committed to 
democratic governance and market economies. As the largest 
single shareholder, the United States must use its influence to 
promote sound investments and honor that bank's unique mandate.
    Before introducing the nominees, I would like to recognize 
our distinguished ranking member for his comments. Senator 
Murphy?

             STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER MURPHY, 
                 U.S. SENATOR FROM CONNECTICUT

    Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Welcome to all of you. I want to thank our nominees and 
their families for being here today. You are all going to serve 
in different roles, but the common thread binding this panel 
all together is your responsibility for furthering our 
transatlantic relationship with Europe. These relationships 
remain close. They are irreplaceable, but they are strained 
right now, as you will find when you get on the ground.
    This is the first hearing that we have had since the 
President submitted his budget for the coming year, and it is 
just unbelievable that this attack on diplomacy and on the 
State Department continues with another proposed 30 percent cut 
to the State Department and USAID. At a time of rising 
instability with refugee flows at their highest since World War 
II, now is the time to be investing in the tools that help 
manage these challenges not proposing dramatic, drastic, and 
draconian cuts. There is no other agency in the Federal 
Government today that has been targeted by this administration 
like the State Department, and you are going to feel that when 
you are on the ground. If the United States is not leading, 
then countries like Russia and China, Saudi Arabia and Iran 
fill the void, bringing with them values that look nothing like 
the ones that we bring to the table when we are present.
    If confirmed, Mr. Pence and Mr. Traina, you are going to be 
representing the United States in Finland and Austria. While 
neither of these countries are members of NATO, both Finland 
and Austria are important partners to the alliance, and Finland 
in particular is seeking a much closer relationship with us.
    Equally critical is our representation on the European Bank 
for Reconstruction and Development. This is a bank that has 
been focused historically on Eastern Europe, the post-Soviet 
republics, but more recently on North Africa and the Middle 
East. And in these places, a strong private sector is so vital 
to political stability that often, as we know, accrues to our 
national security.
    Thank you all for being here today, and I really look 
forward to your testimony.
    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
    Again, I want to thank the nominees and their families and 
encourage you in your opening statements to introduce your 
families and friends. I do not think I can add really to 
Senator Cornyn's introduction of Mr. Pence, but Mr. Pence, if 
you would like to present your opening statement.

 STATEMENT OF ROBERT PENCE, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE THE AMBASSADOR 
   EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF 
               AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF FINLAND

    Mr. Pence. Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, 
distinguished members of the committee, it is an honor to 
appear before you today as President Donald Trump's nominee to 
be the United States Ambassador to the Republic of Finland. I 
am also grateful to Senator Cornyn for his gracious 
introduction of me to this committee.
    I am humbled by the President's selection of me for this 
position and for the support of Vice President Mike Pence, who 
I might add is no relation of mine. I relish the opportunity of 
working with Secretary Rex Tillerson and the competent and 
dedicated women and men of the State Department at Mission 
Finland and in the various federal agencies whose portfolios 
touch and concern Finland. If confirmed, I will direct all of 
my energies in meeting the trust and responsibility placed upon 
me.
    I am here today with the love of my life Suzy; our three 
sons, Steve, Geoff, and Brian; and their children. Our parents 
Hank and Stella and Bud and Dolly have passed on. The memory of 
them and the love, guidance, and support that they and the rest 
of our family have given me makes my being here today possible.
    I am a lifelong Washingtonian. I built a career over the 
past 47 years in commercial real estate. My work has led me to 
develop many of the management and diplomatic skills I expect 
to call upon, if confirmed. My projects have involved 
substantial interactions with political, administrative, civic, 
and business interests. If confirmed, I look forward to working 
with President Sauli Niinisto, Prime Minister Juha Sipila, 
Foreign Minister Timo Soini, and the Finnish people and their 
civic, cultural, educational, military, and religious 
institutions.
    I am most proud of my part in establishing the Gary Sinise 
Foundation, which supports veterans, first responders, and 
their families. I have also supported our troops through my 
work with the American University Law school, and I am proud to 
have participated in launching a program that allows those who 
have served honorably in the military of the United States of 
America to attend our law school tuition free.
    It has been an incredible honor to have served on various 
boards of the Kennedy Center and with my wife Suzy as members 
of the Kennedy Center International committee, which travels 
abroad to advance and create the Kennedy Center Gold Medal in 
the Arts program. That program is at the root of our relations 
with other nations, their citizens, and their cultures. The 
nexus of my professional and private interests is most evident 
in my role as chair of the construction committee of the new 
building at the Kennedy Center. You see it rising on the 
Potomac today.
    If confirmed, I will bring similar dedication and 
leadership to America's relationship with the Government and 
people of Finland. In December, Finland celebrated the 100th 
anniversary as a sovereign nation. Finland has transformed 
itself from a farm and forest economy to a diversified modern 
industrial economy. To do so, it needed a highly educated and 
technically trained workforce. It has succeeded.
    If confirmed, I will employ all of my professional and 
philanthropic and other experiences to advance our nation's 
interest and build upon our alliance with Finland.
    America has welcomed Finland's integration into western 
economic and political structures. Finland provided the venue 
for the Helsinki Accords of 1975, the terms and conditions of 
which Russia has not yet fully complied. Finland joined the 
European Union in 1995 and, while not a member of the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization, it joined NATO's Partnership for 
Peace program and was designated a NATO Enhanced Opportunity 
Partner at the 2014 Wales Summit. Finland is a member of both 
the Arctic Council and the Northern Group, two alliances formed 
to deal with the complex military, commercial, and ecological 
issues confronting the area.
    The important strategic relationship the United States has 
today with Finland is reflected in the numerous high-level 
engagements over the past year to include reciprocal visits to 
Finland by Defense Secretary Mattis and a visit to Washington 
to meet President Trump by President Niinisto. Finland's 
security concerns match our own: North Korea's escalating 
armaments development, the deteriorating situation in the 
Ukraine and Crimea, and the threat of Russian and Chinese naval 
exercises in the Baltic and the Arctic. For a country of about 
5.5 million people with an expanding economy and a GDP of $240 
billion, Finland punches far above its weight.
    If confirmed by the Senate, I assure you of my commitment 
to enforce Secretary Tillerson's clear mandate. My paramount 
obligation is to ensure the safety and security of the embassy 
and its personnel and their families. The events of last week 
in Montenegro reinforce this priority. I will also lead Mission 
Finland in accord with three values clearly enunciated by 
Secretary Tillerson: accountability, honesty, and respect.
    President John Fitzgerald Kennedy famously challenged all 
Americans to ask, ``Ask not what your country can do for you. 
Ask what you can do for your country.'' My answer is this: I 
wish to take this step to pay back, in some small way, the 
country that has offered me so much.
    Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your 
questions.
    [Mr. Pence's prepared statement follows:]


                Prepared Statement of Robert Frank Pence

    Chairman Johnson, Ranking Member Murphy, distinguished members of 
the committee. It is an honor to appear before you today as President 
Donald Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to The 
Republic of Finland. I am also grateful to Senator Cornyn for his 
gracious introduction of me to this committee.
    I am humbled by the President's selection of me for this position, 
and the support of Vice President Pence--who, I might add, is not 
related to me. I relish the opportunity of working with Secretary Rex 
Tillerson and the competent and dedicated women and men of the State 
Department, at Mission Finland, and in the various federal agencies 
whose portfolios touch and concern Finland. If confirmed, I will direct 
all of my energies in meeting the trust and responsibly placed upon me.
    I am here today with the love of my life, Suzy; our three sons 
Steve, Geoff and Brian; and their children. Even though my parents, 
Hank and Stella, and Suzy's parents, Bud and Dolly Sarbacher, have 
passed on, the memory of them and the love, guidance, and support that 
they and the rest of our family have given me make my being here today 
possible.
    By way of introduction, I am a life-long Washingtonian. I built a 
career over the past 47 years in commercial real estate. I have, either 
individually or with others, developed over 35 projects--all of them 
successful. My work has led me to develop many of the management and 
diplomatic skills I expect to call upon if confirmed. Each project has 
involved substantial interactions with local political, administrative, 
civic, and business interests. If confirmed, I look forward to working 
with President Sauli Niinisto, Prime Minister Juha Sipila, Foreign 
Minister Timo Soini, and the people and civic, cultural, educational, 
military and religious institutions of Finland.
    In addition to my professional interests, I have spent much of my 
adult life involved in actions that enrich our society and give back to 
those who have sacrificed so much for our country. My philosophy has 
been: I follow when others lead, I lead when others cannot or will not. 
And I lead when no one else is around or yet involved. I am perhaps 
most proud of my part in establishing the Gary Sinise Foundation which 
supports veterans, first responders, and their families by creating 
unique programs that entertain, educate, inspire, strengthen, and build 
communities. It has been an honor to sponsor USO dinners and concerts 
for our troops both domestically and overseas at the Ramstein Air Force 
Base in Germany featuring The Beach Boys and Gary Sinise's Lt. Dan 
Band. I have supported our troops as well through my work with the AU 
law school and am especially proud of having participated in launching 
a program that allows any new student who served honorably in the 
American military to go to the AU law school tuition free.
    It has been an incredible honor to have been associated with the 
Kennedy Center for the past decade plus. For about twelve years I 
served on various boards at the Kennedy Center and with my wife Suzy 
have represented the Kennedy Center abroad as a part of the Kennedy 
Center Gold Medal in the Arts program. These week-long, intensive, high 
level programs get to the root of our relations with other nations, 
their citizens, and their cultures. The nexus of my professional and 
private interests is most evident in my role on the new building you 
see rising on the Potomac. For four years I chaired the expansion 
committee at the Kennedy Center, and could not be prouder of the 
expansion of the arts in our Nation's capital.
    If confirmed, I look forward to bringing a similar dedication and 
leadership to our country's relationship with the Government and people 
of Finland. In December Finland celebrated its 100th anniversary as a 
sovereign nation. About 700,000 Americans of Finnish descent joined in 
the festivities. If confirmed, I look forward to further cementing the 
ties between our great countries. During the past years Finland has 
transformed itself from a farm and forest economy to a diversified 
modern industrial economy. To do so it needed a highly educated and 
technically trained workforce. It succeeded by demonstrating the unique 
trait that the Finns call sisu (which I take to mean an inner sense of 
mental and physical strength). I hope to build on my professional and 
philanthropic experiences to advance our Nation's interest and build 
our alliance with Finland.
    The United States has welcomed Finland's integration into Western 
economic and political structures over the past decades. Finland 
provided the venue for the Helsinki Accords of 1975, the terms and 
conditions of which Russia has not yet fully complied. Finland joined 
the European Union in 1995 and, while not a member of the North 
Atlantic Treaty Organization, it joined NATO's Partnership for Peace 
program and was designated a NATO Enhanced Opportunity Partner at the 
2014 Wales Summit. Finland shares an 833 mile border with an 
increasingly militant Russia, a southern border on the Baltic Sea over 
which Russia is attempting to extend its hegemony, and a northern 
border which almost reaches the Arctic Sea which Russia is rapidly 
militarizing. Finland is a member of both the Arctic Council and the 
Northern Group, two alliances formed to deal with the complex military, 
commercial, freedom of navigation, and ecological issues confronting 
the area.
    The important strategic relationship the United States has today 
with Finland is reflected in the numerous high level engagements over 
the past year to include reciprocal visits to Finland by Defense 
Secretary Mattis and a visit to Washington to meet President Trump by 
Finland's President Niinisto. Finland's security concerns are 
consistent with our own: North Korea's escalating armaments 
development, the deteriorating situation in the Ukraine, Russia's 
attempted annexation of Crimea, the threat of combined Russian and 
Chinese naval exercises in the Baltic, and the possible adverse effects 
of the Nord Stream II pipeline. For a country of about 5.5 million 
people with an expanding economy and a GDP of about $240 billion 
dollars, Finland punches far above its weight.
    If I am fortunate enough to be confirmed by the Senate, I can 
assure you of my commitment to the women and men serving our country in 
Finland. As Secretary Tillerson has clearly mandated, my paramount 
obligation is to ensure the safety and security of the embassy and its 
personnel and their family members. The events of last week in 
Montenegro reinforce this priority. I am also committed to leading 
Mission Finland in accord with three values enunciated by Secretary 
Tillerson: accountability, honesty, and respect.
    In his Inaugural Address President John Fitzgerald Kennedy famously 
challenged all Americans to `` . . . ask not what your country can do 
for you--ask what you can do for your country.'' My answer is this: ``I 
wish to take this step to pay back, in some small way, the country that 
has offered me so much.''
    Thank you for your time and I look forward to your questions.


    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Pence.
    Our next nominee is Dr. Judy Shelton. Dr. Shelton is the 
nominee to be the Executive Director of the European Bank for 
Reconstruction and Development. Dr. Shelton currently serves as 
chairman of the National Endowment for Democracy as a senior 
fellow at the Atlas Network. She was a former senior research 
fellow at the Hoover Institution and the author of two books on 
global economic developments. Dr. Shelton has testified before 
Congress on numerous occasions as an expert witness on 
international finance, banking, and monetary issues.
    Dr. Shelton?

STATEMENT OF DR. JUDY SHELTON, OF VIRGINIA, TO BE UNITED STATES 
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE EUROPEAN BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND 
                          DEVELOPMENT

    Dr. Shelton. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, 
distinguished members of the committee, I am grateful for the 
opportunity to appear before you today. I am honored that 
President Trump has nominated me to serve as the U.S. Executive 
Director for the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
Development.
    Please let me take this opportunity to acknowledge the 
support of my husband of 40 years, Gilbert Shelton. I am 
thankful that our son Gibb is also here today. And I would like 
to recognize my mother in California, Janette Potter, who is 
watching along with my sisters and brothers.
    More than 3 decades ago, in the mid-1980s, I was doing 
postdoctoral research at Stanford University after having been 
appointed a National Fellow by the Hoover Institution. I found 
myself examining Soviet economic and financial statistics that 
purportedly reflected the robust condition of our nation's 
formidable nuclear adversary. I found it odd that the Soviet 
Government would go to such pains to present itself as 
economically self-sufficient even as its new leader, Mikhail 
Gorbachev, was aggressively seeking loans from the West.
    What started out as a scholarly treatise evaluating the 
impact of Western capital on the Soviet economy turned into a 
hard-hitting policy book published in January 1989 with the 
rather startling title ``The Coming Soviet Crash.'' It had 
become apparent during the course of my research that the USSR 
was going bankrupt.
    That development had significant implications for the 
national security of the United States and the overarching 
defense strategy of the West. Urgent plans for what would 
become the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development 
were converted into reality by April 1991 to meet the challenge 
of an extraordinary moment, the collapse of communism in 
Central and Eastern Europe and the dawning of a new post-Cold 
War era.
    From the start, the charter of the EBRD has embraced the 
unique mandate that only countries that are committed to 
democratic development are eligible to receive financing 
assistance. The emphasis has been on empowering the private 
sector to move recipient countries toward market-oriented 
economies and to promote entrepreneurial initiative.
    And while those guiding principles have proven to be key 
success factors for transitioning nations, they are still met 
with grim resistance where authoritarian tendencies are 
entrenched. The expansion of bank operations into Mongolia, 
Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon, and other countries beyond its original 
region poses additional opportunities as well as potential 
tests.
    The United States has always been and remains the bank's 
largest shareholder. My objective, if confirmed, would be to 
ensure that the EBRD focuses on high-quality infrastructure 
projects that promote economic growth. At the same time, I 
would work with our allies to maintain high standards in the 
cause of freedom by demanding that countries achieve genuine 
progress toward democratic ideals because a nation can go 
bankrupt in ways other than just in the financial sense.
    As a member of the board of directors of the National 
Endowment for Democracy, I served as the designated board 
expert on Russia, Ukraine, and Belarus for 9 years, from 2005 
to 2014. From that perspective, I witnessed the dangers of 
backsliding on fundamental civil liberties and human rights. I 
came to deeply appreciate the importance of democratic 
institutions to guarantee fundamental freedoms and uphold rule 
of law. When the bipartisan NED board elected me chairman last 
year, I was honored and humbled.
    Recognizing that political and economic freedom should 
advance hand in hand would seem to be a powerful prerequisite 
for vigorously representing America's viewpoint at multilateral 
development and financial institutions. Democracy and free 
enterprise share the same moral underpinning.
    In short, given my background in analyzing the strategic 
implications of global financial developments and my strong 
commitment to democracy, I cannot imagine a more stimulating 
challenge or more meaningful responsibility than to take on the 
role of safeguarding our nation's vital interests and deeply 
rooted values at the EBRD, should you deem me worthy of serving 
as U.S. Executive Director.
    Chairman Johnson, Senator Murphy, and members of the 
committee, thank you for considering my nomination. I would be 
most pleased to respond to your questions.
    [Dr. Shelton's prepared statement follows:]


                 Prepared Statement of Dr. Judy Shelton

    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Murphy, distinguished members of the 
committee, I am grateful for the opportunity to appear before you 
today. I am honored that President Trump has nominated me to serve as 
the U.S. Executive Director for the European Bank for Reconstruction 
and Development.
    Please let me take this opportunity to acknowledge the support of 
my husband of 40 years, Gilbert Shelton. I'm thankful that our son, 
Gibb, is also here today. And I'd like to recognize my mother in 
California, Janette Potter, who is watching along with my sisters and 
brothers.
    More than three decades ago, in the mid-1980s, I was doing 
postdoctoral research at Stanford University after having been 
appointed a National Fellow by the Hoover Institution. I found myself 
examining Soviet economic and financial statistics that purportedly 
reflected the robust condition of our nation's formidable nuclear 
adversary. I found it odd that the Soviet Government would go to such 
pains to present itself as economically self-sufficient--even as its 
new leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, was aggressively seeking loans from the 
West.
    What started out as a scholarly treatise evaluating the impact of 
Western capital on the Soviet economy turned into a hard-hitting policy 
book published in January 1989 with the rather startling title: ``The 
Coming Soviet Crash.'' It had become apparent during the course of my 
research that the USSR was going bankrupt.
    That development had significant implications for the national 
security of the United States and the overarching defense strategy of 
the West. Urgent plans for what would become the European Bank for 
Reconstruction and Development were converted into reality by April 
1991 to meet the challenge of an extraordinary moment--the collapse of 
communism in Central and Eastern Europe and the dawning of a new post-
Cold War era.
    From the start, the charter of the EBRD has embraced the unique 
mandate that only countries that are committed to democratic 
development are eligible to receive financing assistance. The emphasis 
has been on empowering the private sector to move recipient countries 
toward market-oriented economies and to promote entrepreneurial 
initiative.
    And while those guiding principles have proven to be key success 
factors for transitioning nations, they are still met with grim 
resistance where authoritarian tendencies are entrenched. The expansion 
of bank operations into Mongolia, Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon and other 
countries beyond its original region poses additional opportunities as 
well as potential tests.
    The United States has always been, and remains, the bank's largest 
shareholder. My objective, if confirmed, would be to ensure that the 
EBRD focuses on high-quality infrastructure projects that promote 
economic growth. At the same time, I would work with our allies to 
maintain high standards in the cause of freedom by demanding that 
countries achieve genuine progress toward democratic ideals--because a 
nation can go bankrupt in ways other than just in the financial sense.
    As a member of the Board of Directors of the National Endowment for 
Democracy, I served as the designated Board expert on Russia, Ukraine, 
and Belarus for nine years, from 2005 to 2014. From that perspective, I 
witnessed the dangers of backsliding on fundamental civil liberties and 
human rights. I came to deeply appreciate the importance of democratic 
institutions to guarantee fundamental freedoms and uphold rule of law. 
When the bipartisan NED Board elected me Chairman last year, I was 
honored and humbled.
    Recognizing that political and economic freedom should advance 
hand-in-hand would seem to be a powerful prerequisite for vigorously 
representing America's viewpoint at multilateral development and 
financial institutions. Democracy and free enterprise share the same 
moral underpinning.
    In short, given my background in analyzing the strategic 
implications of global financial developments and my strong commitment 
to democracy, I cannot imagine a more stimulating challenge or more 
meaningful responsibility than to take on the role of safeguarding our 
nation's vital interests and deeply-rooted values at the EBRD--should 
you deem me worthy of serving as U.S. Executive Director.
    Chairman Johnson, Senator Murphy, and members of the committee, 
thank you for considering my nomination. I would be most pleased to 
respond to your questions.


    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Dr. Shelton.
    Our final nominee is Mr. Trevor Traina. Mr. Traina is the 
President's nominee to be U.S. Ambassador to Austria. Mr. 
Traina is founder and CEO of If Only, a company that allows 
buyers to purchase unique life experiences and donate a portion 
of the proceeds to charity. He has held nonprofit advisory 
positions at the Fine Arts Museum of San Francisco, the Haas 
School of Business, and the Princeton University Art Museum. 
Mr. Traina is an alumnus of Princeton University and St. 
Catherine's College at Oxford.
    Mr. Traina?

  STATEMENT OF TREVOR TRAINA, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AMBASSADOR 
   EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF 
               AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF AUSTRIA

    Mr. Traina. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, distinguished 
members of the committee, I am humbled to be here today as 
President Trump's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to 
Austria. I am excited that the President has presented me with 
this opportunity to work with the White House, Secretary 
Tillerson, and the highly capable team at the State Department 
and the U.S. mission in Vienna.
    I am delighted to be joined by my amazing wife, best 
friend, and partner in all things, Alexis. With her are our two 
wonderful children, Johnny and Delphina. They sustain me and 
they have been very brave at the idea, if I am confirmed, of 
leaving their friends and moving halfway around the work.
    A diplomatic post is both an honor and an obligation. I 
learned this from my grandfather, Wiley Buchanan, who was the 
United States Chief of Protocol and Ambassador to Luxembourg, 
as well as Ambassador to Austria, the very same post for which 
I am being considered.
    My grandfather is no longer with us, but he would be 
absolutely delighted by my nomination. This is not a guess but 
the sworn testimony of my grandmother who just celebrated her 
100th birthday. If I am confirmed, she would have the confusing 
honor of being the wife and the grandmother of the Ambassador 
to Austria. She too is delighted by the idea.
    Thanks to my grandparents, the very first country I ever 
visited was Austria. I stayed at the Ambassador's residence in 
Vienna, and I saw firsthand what it means to serve one's 
country as Ambassador. Chief of Mission responsibilities are 
real and they are not to be taken lightly. I saw how hard my 
grandfather worked, and I also observed how hard our diplomats 
worked to make the world safer and more secure. I heard from my 
grandfather about Russia and the Cold War and the threat of 
nuclear weapons and how the entire Foreign Service labored 
night and day to keep us all safe, advancing our interests as 
we slept soundly back at home. Some day, I thought, I want that 
responsibility too.
    I have returned to Austria many times since to visit 
friends and family and even to introduce my children on their 
first trip to Europe. But I never dreamed I might have the 
opportunity, if confirmed, to return again in the same job that 
my grandfather had.
    Austria has a new Chancellor and governing coalition, and 
if confirmed, I look forward to working with its government in 
pursuit of our shared goals of peace, security, and prosperity 
in Europe and beyond. Although neutral, Austria is an active 
and vital participant in many peacekeeping operations, firmly 
planted in the transatlantic community, and an important 
partner in the fight against crime and terrorism.
    While it is hard to be fully prepared to be a chief of 
mission, I have been fortunate to have educational and cultural 
experiences that have helped me. I have lived in Europe, and 
motivated by my grandfather and my early interest in foreign 
service, I studied international relations at both Princeton as 
an undergrad and at Oxford as a graduate student.
    My business career has also prepared me for the management 
responsibilities of an ambassador. In my career, I have run 
companies, evaluated employees, hired division heads, and 
managed people. I have also set goals and priorities and met 
those goals. I would bring this experience into my new role, if 
confirmed. As a tech entrepreneur, I believe that America's 
lead in new technologies powering the digital revolution are a 
matter of pride and a natural touch point for outreach and for 
advocacy. I would look forward to the opportunity to promote 
U.S. business, especially technology, in Austria.
    Vienna is one of the cultural capitals of Europe and the 
celebration of cultural excellence is at the core of Austrian 
identity. My service on the boards of two of America's top 
museums and my own passions for art and culture have already 
brought me to Austria. I would look forward to the opportunity 
to promote art and cultural exchange, further deepening this 
already strong connection between our societies.
    And finally, I would look forward to outreach to the 
Austrian people. In many places, the memories of World War II 
and the American role in the rebuilding of Europe are fading. 
As we mark the 70th anniversary of the Marshall Plan and its 
positive impact in Europe and Austria, I would hope to refresh 
the bond between Austrians and Americans on the basis of our 
common values and shared post-war history.
    It is an honor to appear before this committee today. If 
confirmed, I commit to give everything I have to represent all 
Americans and to serve our country and its interests 
successfully.
    I thank you for your time, and I look forward to answering 
any questions that you might have.
    [Mr. Traina's prepared statement follows:]


                  Prepared Statement of Trevor Traina

    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, distinguished members of the 
committee, I am humbled to be here today as President Trump's nominee 
to be the United States Ambassador to Austria. I am excited that the 
President has presented me with this opportunity to work with the White 
House, Secretary of State Tillerson, and the highly capable team at the 
State Department and the U.S. Mission in Vienna.
    I am delighted to be joined by my amazing wife, best friend, and 
partner in all things, Alexis. With her are our two wonderful children. 
Johnny and Delphina sustain me and have been very brave at the idea, if 
I am confirmed, of leaving their friends and moving half way around the 
world.
    A diplomatic post is both an honor and an obligation. I learned 
this from my grandfather Wiley Buchanan who was the United States Chief 
of Protocol and Ambassador to Luxembourg as well as Ambassador to 
Austria, the very same post for which I am being considered.
    My grandfather is no longer with us, but he would be absolutely 
delighted by my nomination. This is not a guess, but the sworn 
testimony of my grandmother, who just celebrated her 100th birthday. If 
I am confirmed she would have the confusing honor of being the wife and 
the grandmother of the Ambassador to Austria. She too is delighted by 
the idea.
    Thanks to my grandparents, the very first country I ever visited 
was Austria. I stayed at the Ambassador's Residence in Vienna and saw 
first-hand what it means to serve one's country as Ambassador. Chief of 
Mission responsibilities are real and they are not to be taken lightly. 
I saw how hard my grandfather worked, and I also observed how hard our 
diplomats worked to make the world safer and more secure. I heard from 
my grandfather about Russia and the Cold War and the threat of nuclear 
weapons and how the entire Foreign Service labored night and day to 
keep us all safe, advancing our interests as we slept soundly back at 
home. Someday, I thought, I want that responsibility too.
    I have returned to Austria many times since to visit friends and 
family and even to introduce my children on their first trip to Europe. 
But I never dreamed I might have the opportunity, if confirmed, to 
return again in the same job that my grandfather had!
    Austria is not just a country I know. It is a country I love. It is 
a country with a rich history that sits at the crossroads of Europe and 
enjoys strategic connections to the Balkan states. As a neutral nation, 
Austria plays a significant role in multilateral conversations and in 
diplomatic efforts well beyond the borders of Europe.
    Austria has a new Chancellor and governing coalition and, if 
confirmed, I look forward to working with its government in pursuit of 
our shared goals of peace, security and prosperity in Europe and 
beyond. Although neutral, Austria is an active and vital participant in 
many peacekeeping operations, firmly planted in the Trans-Atlantic 
community, and an important partner in the fight against crime and 
terrorism.
    While it is hard to be fully prepared to be a Chief of Mission, I 
have been fortunate to have educational and cultural experiences that 
have helped me. I have lived in Europe and, motivated by my grandfather 
and my early interest in the Foreign Service, studied International 
Relations at both Princeton as an undergraduate and at Oxford 
University as a graduate student.
    My business career has also prepared me for the management 
responsibilities of an ambassador. In my career, I have run companies, 
evaluated employees, hired division heads, and managed people. I have 
also set goals and priorities and met those goals. I would bring this 
experience into my new role, if confirmed. I have founded or co-founded 
five companies in the technology field and have invested in dozens 
more. I sold my first company to Microsoft, staying on for two years, 
and have seen the best of what large companies and small companies have 
to offer organizationally. I might add I know a bit about bureaucracy 
from the experience! As the CEO of my current company I manage a team 
and budget not unlike that of the Mission in Austria. I believe I would 
be able to lead the Embassy staff with a clear vision and a commitment 
to the highest ethical standards.
    The President has stated his desire for diplomacy that leads to 
economic opportunity. Austria is an increasingly important destination 
for American goods and services and its companies have made significant 
investments in our dynamic economy. As a technology entrepreneur, I 
believe that America's lead in new technologies powering the digital 
revolution are a matter of pride and a natural touchpoint for outreach 
and advocacy in foreign countries. I would look forward to the 
opportunity to promote U.S. business, especially technology, in 
Austria. While technology startups in Austria number only a few 
thousand, 500-1000 new ones are launched every year and existing 
exchange programs with Silicon Valley and Austin, Texas, represent a 
great start to what could be an even bigger connection.
    I have sat on the boards of companies and of organizations like the 
Haas School of Business at UC Berkeley and I have honed my ability to 
seek consensus and to identify opportunities for improvement.
    Vienna is one of the cultural capitals of Europe and the 
celebration of cultural excellence is at the core of Austrian identity. 
My service on the boards of two of America's top museums and my own 
passions for art have already brought me to Austria. I would look 
forward to the opportunity to promote art and cultural exchange between 
the United States and Austria, furthering deepening this already strong 
connection between our societies.
    Finally, I would look forward to outreach to the Austrian people on 
behalf of the people of the United States. In many places the memories 
of World War II and the American role in the rebuilding of Europe are 
fading. As we mark the 70th anniversary of the Marshall Plan and its 
positive impact in Europe and Austria, I would hope to refresh the bond 
between Austrians and Americans on the basis of our common values and 
shared post-war history that continues to demonstrate the full value 
and potential of American friendship.
    It is an honor to appear before the committee today. If confirmed, 
I commit to give everything I have and using all my energy, experience, 
passion, and resolve to represent all Americans and to serve our 
country and its interests successfully.
    I thank you for your time and look forward to answering any 
questions you might have.


    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Traina.
    Let me just say I think it is very pleasing to see three 
very well qualified nominees for these important posts.
    Let me start with Dr. Shelton because I think you do bring 
a very unique level of expertise to this area and to this 
position.
    On Tuesday, we commemorated the murder of Boris Nemtsov by 
dedicating a plaza in front of the Russian embassy in his name, 
Boris Nemtsov Plaza. I had an opportunity to speak at that 
event, and one of the points I made because we gave up a 
section of Wisconsin Avenue, by the way--and we were happy to 
do so. One of the points that I made is it is a tragedy of 
historic and global proportions that Russia did not continue 
down the path begun by Boris Yeltsin and Boris Nemtsov.
    I would just like you--and this is a little bit apart from 
your position, but I just want to utilize your expertise. What 
went wrong? What happened? Can you just kind of give us some 
sort of historical perspective? Because Russia just continues 
to behave worse, become more menacing, whether it is 
interfering in our elections, Montenegro, basically an act of 
war, and now an act against our embassy by not necessarily 
Russia. But just describe what from your perspective has gone 
wrong with Russia.
    Dr. Shelton. Well, thank you very much for the question and 
for the comment, Senator Johnson. I might say I was very aware 
of your involvement in that event on Tuesday, and I think when 
an important U.S. Government official stands up shoulder to 
shoulder with the brave and bold activists that was to honor 
Boris Nemtsov who was fighting to maintain the democratic dream 
for Russia--and he was inspired by the American model and our 
founding values. And he, along with other Russian activists, 
have wanted to secure those institutions of democracy for their 
own country. I think that the most powerful countermeasure we 
have against Russian disinformation and propaganda efforts is 
exactly what you were doing and what I think the National 
Endowment for Democracy has done from its beginning, inspired 
by Ronald Reagan's vision in standing with these people who 
want to shape a better future for their fellow citizens and who 
would follow the democratic model.
    What happened with Russia--and this is why this post is 
particularly interesting to me--is they did have a chance under 
Yeltsin. I was working with a team from the Hoover Institution 
from Stanford in Russia in April 1991 with Yeltsin's team. And 
they were ready to embrace an open market economy. They wanted 
accountability, transparency. They wanted rule of law. They 
wanted the basic civil liberties that Americans enjoy.
    I think perhaps it was that fateful decision to select 
President Putin versus Boris Nemtsov. They were both being 
considered at the time. And what we have seen is in some ways a 
continuation of the cynical tactics of trying to undermine what 
you have been unable to achieve for yourself. We have seen a 
continuation of the disinformation and propaganda techniques. 
They have been updated, but they use trolls and bots and false 
websites and unreal personas, whereas we are standing up and 
countering that with flesh and blood individuals who are 
working in their own countries.
    So I think Russia is still preoccupied with military 
prowess and is willing to sacrifice far too much to subsidize 
energy exports to use as a tool of intimidation, and they just 
have the mindset, unfortunately, that still is closer to the 
Soviet model than what we would have aspired for them to 
become.
    Senator Johnson. So as Senator Murphy--and I do not want to 
speak for the Senator, but as we have traveled around Europe, 
it is the same story: the propaganda, the disinformation, the 
destabilizing efforts, the invasion of Georgia, Crimea, eastern 
Ukraine, the attack on Montenegro's parliament.
    I want to ask all three of you. How do you utilize your new 
position to push back on that, to resist it, try and attempt to 
get Russia to behave in a civilized manner that is more 
stabilizing, that actually promotes peace versus promoting 
instability? I will start with you, Mr. Traina.
    Mr. Traina. Thank you, Senator, for that important 
question.
    I agree with you 100 percent. I think it is a serious 
issue, and it is a 24-hour-a-day, 7-day-a-week issue. Really, 
it is an issue for diplomacy. Right? That is why you are 
sending people like us to these posts who, if confirmed, work 
every single angle. And I think it is just constant vigilance.
    Senator Johnson. Dr. Shelton?
    Dr. Shelton. Well, I might note that with regard to 
Russia's military aggression toward Ukraine, with guidance from 
U.S. Treasury and in cooperation with our G-7 allies and the 
European Union, the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
Development stopped providing any financing for Russia as of 
July 2014. They have maintained that position. That is one way 
to make it clear that they do not accept this kind of behavior 
and these blunt-force tactics.
    Senator Johnson. Mr. Pence?
    Mr. Pence. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
    The United States and our allies--we must stand together. 
One thing that Russia is trying to do is drive wedges between 
the United States and NATO, between NATO and the European 
Union, between Finland and each of those institutions. We will 
enhance and protect the individual security of countries by the 
exercise of collective strength. We must not only by words but 
in deeds show that we are up to the task.
    Having said that, when President Niinisto was here last 
year, he stressed the necessity of undertaking both dialogue 
and deterrence. They go hand in hand, and that is the function 
of diplomacy.
    Thank you.
    Senator Johnson. Thank you.
    Senator Murphy?
    Senator Murphy. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
    Again, let me thank you all for your willingness to serve 
as representatives of the United States abroad.
    Mr. Traina, I wanted to just ask you a question about the 
state of politics in Austria today. The most recent election 
resulted in the Freedom Party, the far right party, gaining 26 
percent of the vote. This is a party that has signed a 
cooperation agreement with Russia's ruling party, and they have 
been included in the current government.
    So what is the role of--this is obviously a trend line that 
we have been watching all over Europe, these far right parties 
doing much better. 26 percent is a big share of the vote in a 
place like that, and the idea that a party representing 26 
percent of the country would sign an agreement with a Russian 
political party is very concerning.
    In your preparation for this job, what is your 
understanding as to the position of the United States 
Government with respect to the Freedom Party, their inclusion 
in the Government, and what will you have to say about that 
when you are on the ground?
    Mr. Traina. Thank you, Senator. As you point out, this is a 
really important question.
    Obviously, Austria is a democracy, an advanced democracy, 
and they have a freely elected government. By all accounts, we 
are already working well with that new government. But like any 
ally or friend, we will ultimately judge that government by 
their deeds and actions.
    Senator Murphy. And do you see it as appropriate to raise 
concerns regarding the increased political power of these 
relatively far right groups?
    Mr. Traina. Thank you, Senator.
    I think there are a number of issues at play, whether it is 
immigration, religious freedom, et cetera, not unique, frankly, 
to Austria but in many places that are all areas that require 
vigilance on our part and require, to your point, dialogue. And 
I also look forward to dialogue with your staff as well on 
these important matters.
    Senator Murphy. Another potential point of friction is over 
the new gas pipeline coming into Europe from Russia, Nordstream 
2. The Trump administration and many people we have talked to 
have expressed their desire to continue the opposition to that 
pipeline that the Obama administration began, but Austria is in 
favor of it. What can you do as Ambassador to try to make 
Austria understand the risk of making the continent of Europe 
more dependent on Russian energy?
    Mr. Traina. Thank you, Senator.
    I agree 100 percent. It is a very complicated issue. 
Austria was the first non-Eastern Bloc country to hook up to 
Russian gas. It was in 1968. So it is 50 years of history 
there. There is a lot of interconnection between the countries 
on this. And half of all the gas used in Austria comes from 
Russia.
    I think this is a time to acknowledge that we have a great 
team in place already. The country team is there. If confirmed, 
I would definitely work very closely with them to understand 
what has already been done on this and, as a team, certainly 
work very hard to advocate because I agree with you. I think it 
is in Austria's best interest and in all of Europe's best 
interest to have multiple sources of energy for a hundred 
different reasons.
    Senator Murphy. Let me just come back to my first question 
and just finish off the thought for you. I think it is very 
important for U.S. Ambassadors to speak up against the growth 
of far right parties, in particular, far right parties that are 
anti-immigrant in nature. The perception of the United States 
today abroad is deeply clouded by the President's perceived 
antipathy towards immigrants to the United States, and I would 
argue it is not perceived. It is real. So I think it is very 
important for the United States, a country that is built on 
immigration, to explain to other countries the value of being 
inclusive of people who come from other places. Right now, 
there is a perception that we are backsliding on our commitment 
to immigration. And so I hope that you will raise concern when 
elements of the ruling party act in ways that violate the best 
traditions of the United States.
    Dr. Shelton, the bank pulled its new investment projects in 
Russia after 2014 or stopped new investment projects in Russia 
following a declaration by the European Council after the 
invasion of eastern Ukraine. What is your sense of whether that 
decision has been impactful at all on the Russian calculus, and 
what are the things Russia would need to do in order to restart 
investment? And there is a sizeable portfolio that is already 
there that exists of over $3 billion that the bank is still 
managing. Does Russia care that the bank has turned off new 
investment?
    Dr. Shelton. I think they care very much. Russia was the 
largest recipient of EBRD financing, and prior to stopping the 
program in July of 2014, financing for Russia was 22 percent of 
their portfolio. It was roughly 8.2 billion euros, and it was 
whittled down very, very quickly over the next 3 years. It is 
down to 2.8 billion euros, so roughly $10 billion down to $3.4 
billion. That is a reduction down to less than 8 percent of the 
portfolio. So I think for a country like Russia that is 
desperately seeking infrastructure financing, it was a very 
strong message. And the sentiment of the majority of the 
shareholders has been made very clear to EBRD management and 
staff that there is no point in bringing new projects involving 
Russia to the attention of the board of directors because they 
will not be inclined to consider any such thing until Russia 
conforms to what is required under the Minsk Agreement. And 
they would have to go back from their military aggression, and 
it would have to be demonstrated in a very convincing way.
    Senator Murphy. And so you do not perceive backsliding on 
that question, internal weakness regarding reinvestment in 
Russia unless, at the very least, Minsk is complied with. You 
are not there.
    Dr. Shelton. Well, not having been confirmed, but my sense 
is that the EBRD directors--and while we have 10 percent, it 
takes a majority. In combination with the G-7, we have about 57 
percent of the vote. And the European Union is well represented 
at that bank and has been in alignment with regard to financing 
for Russia. So my expectation is it would have to be a clear 
reversal.
    Senator Murphy. I would just ask one question of Mr. Pence 
and then we can move on.
    Either you or Senator Johnson noted that they are taking 
over the Arctic Council from the United States--the 
chairmanship. One of their priorities is the full 
implementation of the Paris Climate Agreement. Can you share 
with us your personal feelings on whether the United States 
should reenter the Paris Climate Agreement and how you will 
deal with the deep disappointment there that the United States 
is pulling out? This is a friction point in general with 
European countries, but for the country you are going to 
particularly important given their belief that the Paris 
Climate Agreement is integral for the future preservation of 
the Arctic.
    Mr. Pence. Thank you, Senator.
    Obviously, Finland and its neighboring countries are fully 
in favor of the Paris Agreement. I acknowledge that President 
Trump has been clear in his desire to leave the agreement 
behind. I also believe the President has been clear that United 
States policy will continue with respect to a number of many 
provisions of the Paris deal.
    Having said that, I believe that the administration will 
signal, has signaled its intention to participate in further 
negotiations on the subject, and we will see what comes of it.
    Senator Murphy. He has got diplomatic skills already. 
[Laughter.]
    Senator Murphy. Well said. I actually said that as an 
actual compliment. So I did not mean that facetiously.
    Senator Johnson. Senator Kaine?
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    And thanks and congratulations to the nominees.
    Mr. Traina, you will forgive me. I am going to focus my 
attention on the Virginians. But actually I will probably have 
a question for you too. I want to especially congratulate Dr. 
Shelton and Mr. Pence from Virginia for being nominated. I 
actually will have a question for you, Mr. Traina, too.
    But first thing to Mr. Traina and Mr. Pence, just a piece 
of advice because you will be the head of country missions. 
When I travel as a member of the Foreign Relations committee, 
one thing I try to do is meet in countries with the first and 
second tour FSOs when I go to embassies, and I have fascinating 
discussions with them. I usually do not want the Ambassador in 
the room, and I meet with the first and second tour FSOs. And I 
tell them you have achieved an amazing job that is really hard 
to get. Tell me, after a little bit of experience, what may 
make you stay and make this a career and what is frustrating 
and may make you depart.
    And they never complain about their ambassador. I have 
never had that happen. But they do complain about red tape and 
challenges. Some of them say we have to get so intensely 
security vetted to get the job, and then once I get the job, if 
I want to order five pencils, I have to go through an amazing 
process because they think I am going to steal the five pencils 
or something. So those discussions are interesting.
    You will be in charge of some fantastic public servants, 
and I would encourage you to do all you can do to make them 
feel like they can make an entire career out of it because I 
think we really need them.
    Mr. Pence, I wanted to ask a question a little bit about 
Senator Murphy on the Arctic Council. Finland has taken a 2-
year position as the chair of the council following the United 
States. In preparation for this, how much do you know about 
what the priorities are either of the United States or Finland 
or the entire council right now? What are the areas you think 
the council will be devoting its attention to over the next 
couple years? We talk a lot about this on the Armed Services 
committee where I also serve. But I am curious as to your 
understanding about what the priorities of the council or the 
U.S. or Finland might be.
    Mr. Pence. Thank you, Senator, for the question.
    The Arctic Council itself has enunciated what its 
priorities are: the security of the Arctic, the preservation of 
the ecological situation, the climate of the Arctic, the free 
and open ability of nations to transit the area in a time of 
clearing seas. And they expect overall to ensure the safety of 
bordering nations and those who employ it. They are also 
acutely aware that with the change in the climate and the 
melting of the ice that the Arctic is going to become an 
increasingly direct and profitable route for international 
trade that is engaged. It is going to be more important and a 
cheaper avenue than the Suez Canal. The geopolitical 
consequences of that are going to be extraordinary.
    They are also--Finland, as we are--we are acutely concerned 
about the militarization of the Arctic. I believe the Russians 
have 16 bases they have either opened or are reopening. They 
are building a number of airfields up there. They have 40-some 
heavy nuclear powered--excuse me. They are not all nuclear 
powered--40 heavy icebreakers in the area. They have a big head 
start of us up there, to which we, Finland, and the free world 
needs to respond.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you for that.
    Let me ask you each, Mr. Traina and Mr. Pence, a question 
dealing with another aspect of our military, which is NATO. 
Both Finland and Austria--neither are NATO members, but both 
are participating with NATO in some critical ways. Why do you 
not talk about the current state of the relationship between, 
first, Austria and then Finland in NATO and whether you see any 
dramatic change in their relationship in the coming years?
    Mr. Traina. Thank you, Senator. Thank you for that 
question.
    As you note, Austria is a nonaligned nation, but they are 
part of the Partnership for Peace initiative associated with 
NATO, and they also are really very actively participating in 
numerous peacekeeping initiatives. So currently they are in 14 
different peacekeeping initiatives in places like Bosnia-
Herzegovina and Kosovo. Kosovo, obviously, is a NATO 
initiative, the peacekeeping there. So while they are by policy 
nonaligned, they are really a great partner in a lot of these 
areas, as well as sort of general crime fighting and 
trafficking and other areas like that.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you.
    Mr. Pence?
    Mr. Pence. Thank you, Senator.
    First, indeed, Finland is not a member of NATO. It is 
involved in various NATO operations, including the operation 
Resolute Support in Afghanistan. Finland has participated in 
actions in Iraq. They are in a unique position to join or not 
to join. At present, a majority, a slight majority but a 
majority nevertheless, of the Finnish people are opposed to 
Finland joining NATO. That may change, but until it does, they 
are not a member. But they work closely with NATO and permit 
certain actions within their country in furtherance of NATO 
policies.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you very much.
    Dr. Shelton, if I could ask you one question. On the 
Foreign Relations committee, we are a little bit creatures of 
our region. So almost all my work for 5 years has been the 
Middle East and the Americas, and I have done little work on 
the EBRD.
    But I was noting something that I was curious about. One 
country has graduated from the EBRD and that is the Czech 
Republic in 2008. What are criteria used to gauge whether a 
country kind of is sufficiently developed to graduate out? Are 
there other countries close to graduating? Does the EBRD--as we 
expand the number of countries we operate in, is there any 
danger of the EBRD spreading itself too thin with the resources 
that it has?
    Dr. Shelton. Thank you for the question, Senator Kaine.
    Graduation is a priority through the international affairs 
part of the Treasury Department, and we encourage that. There 
is a graduation process at the EBRD, and you are correct that 
only that single country, the Czech Republic, has graduated.
    The slowness in having countries qualify to proceed I think 
to some extent reflects a very long economic recovery in Europe 
since the financial crisis of 2008 and 2009. Also, I believe 
that countries have been affected by Russia's aggression, and 
they are reluctant to give up sources of financing. They feel 
pressure with regard to energy security. And so they have 
wanted to stay engaged with the EBRD.
    It would be my focus, if confirmed, to have a more 
transparent, rules-based process for evaluating when a country 
is successfully moving toward graduation. They do at the EBRD a 
country analysis for each new recipient and that also includes 
a political assessment because they not only have to embrace 
democratic principles as an ideal, but they have to demonstrate 
in a genuine way that they are applying them.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
    You have been asked some specific questions. Let me just 
throw it open, a little more general question. I will ask each 
one of you the same one. I just want your opinion, your 
evaluation, if you are confirmed, what is going to be the top 
issue--if you have issues, you can expand it, but I mean really 
the top issue you think you will be dealing with. And what will 
be the top opportunity in terms of the relationship between the 
U.S. and either your country or organization? I will start with 
you, Mr. Pence.
    Mr. Pence. Thank you, Senator.
    I am a student of Cicero who lived about 2,000 years ago. 
If I may paraphrase part of one of his works. Civil liberties 
are meaningless if the state is not secure. That is the first 
and foremost and last sine qua non on the international stage. 
We need to assure ourselves and the Finnish people and each 
other and the rest of the free world really that there will be 
peace.
    Thank you.
    Senator Johnson. Dr. Shelton?
    Dr. Shelton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    I do think energy security for Europe is a top priority. 
And EBRD financing has provided resources for energy 
infrastructure. We need to make sure that the projects provide 
alternative routes, alternative suppliers, and an array of 
different types of energy available to countries so they are 
not subject to intimidation.
    I would seek to advance the national security interests of 
the United States, as well as the economic interests. American 
companies should have a chance not only to bid on projects. So 
we need to have a transparent procurement process. But also, 
the projects should be oriented to increase growth so that 
American products can find export markets in those recipient 
countries.
    I see this, if confirmed, to be an opportunity for the 
United States to leverage its capital investment through strong 
leadership working with our allies very closely to advance our 
strategic interests and to try to shape events across Europe 
and the other regions of operation which now include the Middle 
East and northern Africa and Central Asia. We want to have the 
most advantageous economic and political outcomes for our own 
nation.
    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Dr. Shelton.
    Mr. Traina?
    Mr. Traina. Thank you so much, Senator.
    So, first, priority. Priority will always be security, the 
security and safety of my mission, of the 15,000 or so 
Americans who reside in Austria and the 700,000 or so Americans 
who visit Austria every year.
    Issue. I think currently the energy issue is a significant 
one that merits a lot of thought and attention.
    And opportunities. I think leveraging our strong 
relationship with Austria vis-a-vis their neighboring nations 
and shoring those nations up, as well as business. I think 
Austria is an advanced economy, and there is a lot of 
opportunity for us to do more together in that arena.
    Thank you.
    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Mr. Traina.
    Senator Murphy?
    Senator Murphy. Just two final questions.
    Mr. Traina, let me build upon the opportunity you 
acknowledged, which is to work with neighboring countries. One 
of the points of tension between Austria and neighboring 
countries is this issue of immigration that I had mentioned. 
The new government has advocated for an array of measures 
including border closures to reduce immigration not only into 
Austria but also through Austria into Europe. And that often 
runs counter particularly with the generally more liberal 
refugee policies of Italy and Germany.
    So what is the role of the United States to try to make 
sure that Austria's restrictive immigration policy does not end 
up, A, pulling apart Europe and, B, simply transferring the 
burden of refugee flows which continue on to other countries?
    Mr. Traina. Thank you, Senator, for that question.
    I acknowledge it is absolutely an issue, a highly topical 
issue right now. I think there is an opportunity for us to work 
directly with them to continue to communicate our thoughts and 
opinions on this. There is also an opportunity via the EU. 
There is discontinuity right now between the EU's position and 
Austria's position on this same issue. And so I think we 
triangulate and we have continual dialogue on this.
    Senator Murphy. And, Dr. Shelton, I want to pick up on one 
of the things you mentioned in your last answer, which was 
energy security. How do we compete with a Russian energy export 
model that is based on outright subsidy to drive down pricing? 
Whereas we are using more traditional financing vehicles to try 
to counter that influence. I have failed to understand how we 
compete with the Russians on energy security without a direct 
subsidy of our own coming either from the United States or from 
the Europeans. So how does a bank try to deal with the issue of 
energy security when the Russians are just throwing cash into 
these projects? Nordstream 2, for instance, cannot work as a 
pure financial play. It only works with just a heavy Russian 
subsidy on the front and back end.
    Dr. Shelton. Thank you so much for that question, and I 
think you make an excellent point.
    We have seen that Russia is willing to subsidize activities 
that are not in their economic interests, and we can only 
assume for purposes of political power using energy as a 
weapon.
    What the EBRD has done, which I think is quite wise, is 
they have provided significant financing for the southern gas 
corridor. The financing projects have aimed both at the gas 
fields--these are deepwater wells in the Caspian Sea--and also 
the pipelines to guarantee alternative delivery routes. And the 
EBRD does work based on market principles, but they have been 
able to put together very attractive and sometimes creative 
financing for special projects. They have the confidence of 
Western providers of foreign direct investment. They work well 
with banks. So they can provide financing with highly desirable 
attributes and in that way be competitive.
    Senator Murphy. Again, let me thank you all. I think you 
will all be confirmed hopefully soon. And we really look 
forward to--those of us who work on transatlantic issues, are 
heavily involved in them look forward to working with all three 
of you. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Johnson. Thank you, Senator Murphy.
    Again, I want to thank the nominees for your willingness to 
serve. I want to thank their families for your willingness to 
support your family members. To the Traina children, I 
certainly understand the concern about leaving their friends, 
but it is a pretty exciting opportunity. Your dad is doing a 
pretty important thing. So I am sure you will enjoy your time 
in Austria.
    With that, again, thank you for providing your testimony, 
your responses.
    The hearing record will remain open for statements or 
questions until the close of business on Monday, March 5th.
    This hearing is adjourned.
    [Whereupon, at 11:05 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]


                              ----------                              



              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record 
       Submitted to Robert Frank Pence by Senator Robert Menendez

    Question 1. Do you commit to report regularly to the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee on efforts by the Russian Government to interfere 
in the democratic processes of Finland?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the U.S. Mission to Finland 
stands firmly with Finland in countering Russia's malign influence and 
will report on the Russian Government's attempts to interfere with 
Finland's democratic processes.

    Question 2. What specific measures will you take to cooperate with 
the European Center of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats?

    Answer. At Finland's initiative, nine countries, including the 
United States, signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) establishing 
the European Center of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats in 
April 2017. Since then, four additional countries have accepted 
invitations to participate in cooperation under the MOU, and another 
three have expressed serious interest in participating. NATO and the EU 
will join in the activities of the Center. The Center will serve as a 
hub of expertise to complement and bolster national and institutional 
efforts to strengthen our capabilities to counter hybrid threats. If 
confirmed, I will continue to work with our Finnish counterparts, the 
other states, NATO, and the European Union, who participate in the 
Center's work to develop more effective cooperation against the diverse 
array of hybrid threats and to expand U.S. participation by all 
relevant sectors. Further, if confirmed, I would employ every lawful 
means available under U.S. law in completing this task.
Diversity
    Research from private industry demonstrates that, when managed 
well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of creativity 
and productivity.

    Question 3. What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors and 
managers within the embassy are fostering an environment that's diverse 
and inclusive?

    Answer. I appreciate the importance of fostering diverse and 
inclusive teams. Throughout my professional career and experience in 
business, I have seen the value of diversity in leadership positions. 
In keeping with Secretary Tillerson's strong emphasis on diversity, if 
confirmed I will develop an inclusive work environment at Embassy 
Helsinki that encourages all perspectives. I will ensure that all 
supervisors receive regular formal training and guidance on EEO 
principles, diversity, and inclusion. In addition to leading by 
example, I will monitor the supervisors at the Embassy to ensure they 
are fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive.

    Question 4.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups at 
the embassy?

    Answer. If confirmed, first and foremost, by my actions I intend to 
create an environment that is diverse and inclusive. I recognize that, 
to a large extent, the composition of the Mission Team has already been 
established by others. Nevertheless, all employees will quickly come to 
understand that, whatever their backgrounds may be, we will form one 
united, cohesive team that will operate without discrimination and 
without any tolerance for behavior that lacks respect for others or 
that evinces any hint of dishonesty or other improper behavior. 
Similarly, through both my actions and the actions of supervisors, all 
members of the staff will understand what they need not tolerate and 
what actions of theirs will not be tolerated. I will, simultaneously, 
encourage all employees to report any breeches of policy with respect 
to conduct. I will assure my team that retribution will not be condoned 
and that U.S. law, including policies and regulations of the State 
Department, will be promptly and scrupulously followed.

    Question 5.  As a possible official of the Trump administration, 
will you condemn and oppose policies and practices that are derogatory 
and discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, 
sexual orientation, or gender identity?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 6.  Will you uphold the rights of all persons to equality 
and freedom from discrimination, and call on Americans to refrain from 
discrimination of any sort?

    Answer. Yes.

                               __________


           Responses to Additional Questions for the Record 
     Submitted to Robert Frank Pence by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. From 1992 to the present I have been intimately involved, 
as a student, teacher, businessman, and as a civic and political 
advocate for positions that fortify the preservation of our rights and 
liberty. I have given countless lectures, and participated in myriad 
conferences, domestically and abroad, to advocate for democracy, the 
rule of law, and the preservation of human rights. I have been an 
outspoken advocate of democracy, particularly of American values, and, 
additionally, of causes related to Israel, schools for women in 
Afghanistan, and other causes that my wife Suzy and I have deemed 
worthy of our support, time, and money.
    The arts and cultural enrichment are integral to a democracy and 
have been at the center of my life. associated with the Kennedy Center 
for the past decade plus. For about twelve years I served on various 
boards at the Kennedy Center and with my wife Suzy have represented the 
Kennedy Center abroad as a part of the Kennedy Center Gold Medal in the 
Arts program. These week-long, intensive, high level programs get to 
the root of our relations with other nations, their citizens, and their 
cultures.

    Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in 
Finland today? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if 
confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Finland? What do 
you hope to accomplish through these actions?

    Answer. Finland has a strong record on human rights and is a close 
partner for the United States in promoting human rights around the 
world. Finland is one of the world's most generous providers of 
development aid. NGOs have reported incidents of anti-Muslim and anti-
immigrant speech and sentiment in Finland. Authorities generally 
investigate, and where appropriate, prosecute such cases. If confirmed, 
I will encourage Finland to continue protecting human rights at home 
and abroad. I will also regularly engage with representatives from 
government, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations to 
stress the importance of tolerance and diversity and to share best 
practices and new ideas for promoting human rights.

    Question 3. 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 Finland in 
advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

    Answer. Human rights are widely respected in Finland and its legal 
framework for protecting human rights meets international standards, so 
any obstacles to addressing human rights issues must be viewed in this 
context. Civil society and democratic institutions are both strong and 
inclusive in Finland. To the extent that Finland exhibits human rights 
problems, they are largely societal and are adequately addressed by the 
country's judicial system, government institutions, and non-
governmental organizations. If confirmed, I will work with those 
institutions and organizations to exchange experiences and best 
practices to further our shared values.

    Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in Finland? If confirmed, what steps will you 
take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and 
ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security 
cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

    Answer. Yes, I am committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in Finland. If confirmed, I will ensure that 
Embassy Helsinki staff have access to appropriate training on Leahy Law 
requirements. I will also ensure Embassy Helsinki thoroughly vets 
individuals and units it nominates to participate in U.S.-funded 
security assistance activities.

    Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with 
Finland to address cases of key political prisoners or persons 
otherwise unjustly targeted by Finland?

    Answer. Finland has a strong human rights record and a generally 
independent and impartial judiciary. There are no reports of political 
prisoners or detainees, or politically motivated prosecutions, in the 
country. If confirmed, I will call out any future cases of this kind if 
they occur, and work with the Finnish Government to encourage their 
resolution in accordance with Finnish and international law and 
commitments.

    Question 6. Will you engage with Finland on matters of human 
rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will make matters of human rights, civil 
rights, and governance part of Embassy Helsinki's regular public 
outreach. I believe these are excellent areas for people-to-people 
engagements where our citizens can exchange views, experiences and best 
practices. Given Finland's excellent record on these issues, I will 
also look for opportunities where we can jointly cooperate to provide 
expertise to third countries.

    Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in Finland?

    Answer. My investment portfolio includes companies that have a 
presence in Finland. I am committed to ensuring that my official 
actions will not give rise to a conflict of interest. I will divest my 
interests in those companies the State Department Ethics Office deemed 
necessary to avoid a conflict of interest, and will remain vigilant 
with regard to my ethics obligations.

    Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when 
managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of 
creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote, 
mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and 
underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

    Answer. First, I will attempt to create a work environment in which 
individual talents and skills will flourish and be recognized. Second, 
it will be my policy that no employee will interfere with the efforts 
of any other employee to pursue my first objective and the enjoyment 
thereof by other employees. My experience in business, over a period of 
47 years, has lead me to conclude, as did the ancient philosophers and 
all of the great artists and thinkers of history, that there is no one 
person, or school of thought, or culture, or religion, that contains 
all of the best attributes of mankind. In my businesses, which have 
employed, on average, about 150 people at one time, I have come to 
appreciate, enjoy, and profit by the amalgamation and enhancement of 
human knowledge which is not culturally dependent. At any one time (and 
for most of the time), my companies have employed individuals from, 
among others, Jordan, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Mexico, Guatemala, 
Brazil, Egypt, Korea, the Dominican Republic, UAE, and many countries 
in Africa. Similarly, at our Dulles Expo Center in Chantilly, VA, we 
regularly stage major business and cultural events for organizations 
from Japan, India, and Pakistan, to name but the largest groups of 
attendees. Each of our employees knows, because this is our policy, 
that upward movement in our organizations is our goal and that it is 
realizable. By the nature of our businesses, we are in service to 
others. To be clear, we do not discriminate on any basis and we do not 
allow our employees to do so either. These views will be well received, 
I am sure, by the Finns whose president, Sauli Niinist0, said in his 
2017 New Year's Address that ``we must proceed together.''

    Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors at the Embassy is fostering an environment that is diverse 
and inclusive?

    Answer. First and foremost, by my actions I intend to create an 
environment that is diverse and inclusive. I recognize that, to a large 
extent, the composition of the Mission Team has already been 
established by others. Nevertheless, all employees will quickly come to 
understand that, whatever their backgrounds may be, we will form one 
united, cohesive team that will operate without discrimination and 
without any tolerance for behavior that lacks respect for others or 
that evinces any hint of dishonesty or other improper behavior. I will 
schedule frequent meetings with supervisory personnel to insure that 
official policy is both understood and implemented. Similarly, through 
both my actions and the actions of supervisors, all members of the 
staff will understand what they need not tolerate and what actions of 
theirs will not be tolerated. I will, simultaneously, encourage all 
employees to report any breeches of policy with respect to personal 
conduct. I will assure my team that retribution will not be condoned 
and that U.S. law, including policies of the State Department, will be 
promptly and scrupulously followed.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Robert Frank Pence by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

    Question 1. How would you approach the question of Finland's 
possible membership in NATO if Finland decides to seek it? Of course, 
the accession of a new member of the alliance is a question for all 
NATO allies, but what factors would you consider in making a 
recommendation for or against such request from the perspective of the 
U.S. Ambassador to Finland, if you are confirmed?

    Answer. The United States would welcome such a strong and capable 
partner's decision to apply for membership in the Alliance, but the 
decision on whether to do so is up to Finland's political leadership 
and the Finnish people. Opinion polls indicate a significant number of 
Finnish people support joining NATO, but a slight majority continues to 
oppose membership. While not a NATO Ally, Finland maintains a high 
level of cooperation and interoperability with the Alliance and has 
been an active member of NATO's Partnership for Peace since its launch 
in 1994. At the 2014 Wales NATO Summit, Finland became one of a handful 
of Enhanced Opportunities Partners (EOP) with increased access to NATO 
political consultations and training/exercises. Finland has been a 
member of the NATO Response Force since 2012 and the NATO Strategic 
Airlift Capability program since its inception in 2008. If confirmed, I 
will continue to work with Finland to deepen our bilateral security 
cooperation, acknowledging the importance of maintaining NATO's Open 
Door policy for Finland.

    Question 2. Finland has been seeking to diversify its energy supply 
sources and enhance its energy independence, in part by deepening its 
integration in the wider European, Nordic, and Baltic energy markets. 
What would you do, if confirmed, to encourage this? How would you help 
position American companies to participate?

    Answer. Finland has a vital role to play in Europe's energy 
security and diversification, in particular as a leader in energy 
efficiency and biofuels research and development. Its energy policies 
align with the EU, and its energy targets generally meet or exceed EU 
requirements. Finland is investing in liquefied natural gas terminals 
and, in October 2015, the Finnish Government decided to move forward 
with the Balticconnector gas pipeline to Estonia, which would provide 
an opportunity to diversify Finland's supply via the European gas 
network. The European Commission will provide 187.5 million euros of 
Balticconnector's estimated 250 million euro cost. U.S. companies, such 
as General Electric, are already major players in Finland's energy 
sector. The greatest opportunity is for small U.S. energy innovators to 
partner with Finnish firms to develop and apply new energy technologies 
not only in Finland but in the EU. I understand that the U.S. Embassy 
in Helsinki has and will continue to prioritize promoting these U.S. 
business opportunities through events such as Vaasa Energy Week and in 
sectors such as forestry that hold great promise as a new source of 
renewable energy. If confirmed, I will work to support continued energy 
diversification across Europe, encouraging Finland to support projects 
that will diversify Europe's energy supply and oppose those that 
threaten it, such as Nord Stream II.

    Question 3. Despite its long-standing economic ties with Russia, 
Finland has continued to support existing EU sanctions on Russia. If 
confirmed, what will you do to encourage the Finnish Government to 
maintain its support for the sanctions regime until the Minsk 
agreements for Ukraine are fully implemented?

    Answer. Finland has been a strong defender--along with the United 
States and other European partners--of Ukraine's sovereignty and 
territorial integrity. Finnish officials have consistently reiterated 
their firm opposition to Russia's occupation and attempted annexation 
of Crimea, and have called on Russia to fulfill its commitments under 
the Minsk agreements to resolve the conflict in eastern Ukraine. 
Finland has voted to maintain EU sanctions against Russia and has made 
clear sanctions should remain until Russia fulfills its Minsk 
commitments, including reducing the violence in eastern Ukraine, 
removing heavy equipment and weapons, allowing full and unfettered 
access to OSCE monitors, and returning control of the international 
border to Ukraine. If confirmed, I will work to ensure U.S. and Finnish 
policies toward Russia remain closely coordinated.

    Question 4. Finland has a highly industrialized, competitive market 
economy. If confirmed, what would you do to expand bilateral trade 
between our countries, particularly in the technology sector, which is 
an area where the United States and Finland both excel?

    Answer. The United States and Finland work together with the 
European Union to promote job creation and prosperity on both sides of 
the Atlantic. The United States' trade relationship with Finland is 
driven in large part by innovative information and communications 
technology enterprises. Finland shares a commitment to open commercial 
data flows that support trade and investment in these sectors. If I am 
confirmed as Ambassador, one of my top priorities will be promoting 
fair and reciprocal trade and investment, building upon the 
considerable work the U.S. Embassy in Helsinki has already done. I will 
encourage the sharing of best practices while helping American 
companies recognize business opportunities in Finland and will showcase 
for Finnish companies the many opportunities to invest in the United 
States. United States exports to Finland were valued at $1.5 billion in 
goods in 2017 and $2.1 billion in services in 2016. United States 
imports from Finland were $5.9 billion in goods in 2017 and $2.5 
billion in services in 2016. There is potential to increase both U.S. 
exports to Finland and Finnish foreign direct investment in the United 
States. If confirmed, I will make this a priority for all agencies 
working in the U.S. Mission to Finland.

    Question 5. I have been outspoken in drawing attention to Russian 
malign influence activities in the United States and elsewhere. I was 
pleased to see that in April 2017, the United States joined Finland and 
several other NATO and EU countries in establishing a new, Helsinki-
based multinational Center of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats 
aimed at helping to counter cyber attacks, disinformation, and 
propaganda. If confirmed, will you support this effort? How can the 
United States and Finland deepen our cooperation in this area?

    Answer. The Transatlantic Community faces continued security 
threats from Russia. Finland has leveraged its geography and historical 
experience to develop a nuanced and knowledgeable approach to Russia. 
Finland is pragmatic and practical when it comes to Russia--but also 
recognizes Russia's challenge to the European security order. At 
Finland's initiative, nine countries, including the United States, 
signed a memorandum of understanding establishing the European Center 
of Excellence for Countering Hybrid Threats in April 2017. Since then, 
four additional countries have joined, and another three have expressed 
serious interest in joining. NATO and the EU will participate in the 
activities of the Center. The Center will serve as a hub of expertise 
to complement and bolster national and institutional efforts to 
strengthen our capabilities and counter hybrid threats. If confirmed, I 
will continue to work with our Finnish counterparts and the other 
member states of the Center to develop more effective cooperation 
against the diverse array of hybrid threats, and to expand U.S. 
participation by all relevant sectors.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Dr. Judy Shelton by Senator Robert Menendez

Russia
    Question 1.  What is the policy of the United States regarding new 
EBRD projects in Russia?

    Answer. The United States does not support any new EBRD projects in 
Russia. In response to guidance from the United States and our G-7 
partners, and the European Union, EBRD management has not brought 
forward any new projects for Russia since July 2014, following Russia's 
military aggression in Crimea.
Diversity and Combatting Hostile Work Environments
    Research from private industry demonstrates that, when managed 
well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of creativity 
and productivity.

    Question 2.  What steps will you take to ensure that supervisors 
and managers within the European Bank for Reconstruction and 
Development (EBRD) are fostering an environment that's diverse and 
inclusive?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will use my oversight role on the EBRD's 
Board of Executive Directors to try to ensure that EBRD management 
fosters an environment that is diverse and inclusive. I will also 
advocate for these issues to be considered, as appropriate, in the 
development and review of human resources policies in the EBRD's Budget 
and Administrative Affairs committee.

    Question 3.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups at 
the EBRD?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will promote, mentor and support my staff 
who come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups, 
consistent with fair management practices and relevant EBRD policies. 
The EBRD has increased its emphasis on inclusion in its operations, 
adding inclusion as a key quality of successful transition to a 
sustainable market economy.

    Question 4.  As a possible official of the Trump administration, 
will you condemn and oppose policies and practices that are derogatory 
and discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, 
sexual orientation, or gender identity?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will condemn and oppose policies and 
practices that are derogatory and discriminatory on the basis of race, 
religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

    Question 5.  Will you uphold the rights of all persons to equality 
and freedom from discrimination, and call on Americans to refrain from 
discrimination of any sort?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will uphold the rights of all persons to 
equality and freedom from discrimination, and call on Americans to 
refrain from discrimination of any sort.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Dr. Judy Shelton by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

    Question 1. The EBRD charter states that countries must be 
committed to applying the principles of multiparty democracy, 
pluralism, and market economics in order to qualify for EBRD loans. I 
believe it is important for the international community to assist the 
countries of the Western Balkans to successfully complete their 
transitions to democratic, market-oriented members of the transatlantic 
community. What is the EBRD doing in this region? If confirmed, what 
will you do to intensify this effort?

    Answer. It is true that countries in the Western Balkans are still 
transitioning to well-functioning, sustainable market economies. The 
state remains a major player in key industries in several countries of 
the region, significant progress on privatizations remains elusive, and 
private sector businesses operate in a challenging business environment 
plagued by weak rule of law, a sizable informal sector, corruption and 
cumbersome tax administration, and difficulties in getting reliable 
electricity supply.
    The EBRD has been and continues to be an important partner in the 
region, delivering close to $800 million in new investments in both 
2016 and 2017, coupled with policy dialogue and technical assistance. 
The EBRD has focused in particular on enhancing private sector 
competitiveness, strengthening the investment climate, and improving 
regional connectivity and integration through both hard infrastructure, 
like roads and energy links, and softer elements like harmonizing 
regulations and tariffs. Last month the EBRD launched a new one-stop 
regional investment platform for interested investors.
    A key priority going forward should be increased privatization 
advocacy. If confirmed, I would like to help encourage the EBRD to 
maintain an intensified focus on reforms, commercialization efforts, 
and corporate governance improvements in the region's state-owned 
enterprises in an effort to unlock pre-privatization investments and 
eventual privatization progress. In addition, I would call on the EBRD 
to enhance its work to advance government and corporate reforms to 
improve economic and market institutions, transparency, competition, 
and the overall investment climate across the Western Balkan economies. 
I will also encourage the EBRD to continue to provide candid political 
assessments for its countries of operation, since political 
developments affect aspects of the transition to a market economy.

    Question 2. Environmentally sound and sustainable development is 
central to the EBRD's mandate. In light of the administration's 
decision to withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement, I'm curious to 
hear your views on climate change. How would you consider this issue as 
it relates to the EBRD's work?

    Answer. I believe that it is important for countries to have 
affordable and reliable access to energy. If confirmed, I will evaluate 
each EBRD energy project on an individual basis, weighing various 
factors including the project's potential benefits for transition to a 
sustainable market-based economy. If confirmed, I will work closely 
with the Treasury Department to review energy projects against the new, 
broader, objectives recently set forth by Treasury. This includes 
supporting energy projects that go to the core of supporting a 
country's development. This can and should include helping countries 
access and use fossil fuels more cleanly and efficiently. By pursuing 
projects that employ a mix of energy sources, the EBRD can support the 
development of robust, efficient, competitive, and integrated global 
markets for energy.

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                Trevor Traina by Senator Robert Menendez

    Question 1. Do you commit to report regularly to the Senate Foreign 
Relations Committee on efforts by the Russian Government to interfere 
in the democratic processes of Austria?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the United States Mission to 
Austria stands firmly with Austria in countering Russia's malign 
influence and will report on the Russian Government's attempts to 
interfere with Austria's democratic processes.

    Question 2. What will your priorities be with respect to 
coordinating with the Austrian Government on policies on the Western 
Balkans?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will encourage the Austrian Government to 
support regional peacekeeping efforts by maintaining its substantial 
troop numbers in NATO's Kosovo Force (KFOR). Austria's KFOR 
participation is essential to mission success and the creation of a 
stable, secure environment that allows Kosovo and Serbia to advance 
their political dialogue. I will also urge the Austrians to push the 
Western Balkan countries to accelerate political and economic reforms 
that are necessary for EU accession. These reforms will build 
resilience against Russian attempts to create instability in the 
Balkans through bribery, abuse of energy and trade ties, and use 
propaganda to advance its agenda. Austrian Chancellor Kurz has pledged 
to focus on the Western Balkans during Austria's EU presidency 
beginning July 1.

    Question 3. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when 
managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of 
creativity and productivity. What steps will you take to ensure that 
supervisors and managers within the embassy are fostering an 
environment that's diverse and inclusive?

    Answer. Good management starts at the top, and, if confirmed, I 
would model to supervisors the kinds of behaviors I would want them to 
extend to their teams. Good management also requires an open door, 
clear communication of goals, and shared objectives, and I would work 
with my team to ensure that our shared environment is respectful and 
inclusive. If confirmed, I will ensure that projects with a scope for 
leadership and opportunities to excel are distributed equally among 
sections, people of different ranks, cones, experiences, and 
backgrounds, giving everyone an equal opportunity to make a difference 
in the Mission's impact on our foreign policy goals. I would also be 
respectful of work-life balance for all employees, recognizing that 
time at home with families is good for both employees' health and the 
health and productivity of an organization.

    Question 4.  What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups at 
the embassy?

    Answer. I currently run an extremely diverse company, with over 50 
percent female employees and a wide variety of ethnicities and sexual 
orientations. I am proud of this and have worked hard to both mentor 
and nurture my team members. Good management takes time, listening 
skills, patience, and empathy. When people of various viewpoints and 
backgrounds feel empowered to work together, great results ensue. I 
would bring this experience to the Mission.

    Question 5.  As a possible official of the Trump administration, 
will you condemn and oppose policies and practices that are derogatory 
and discriminatory on the basis of race, religion, nationality, gender, 
sexual orientation, or gender identity?

    Answer. Yes.

    Question 6.  Will you uphold the rights of all persons to equality 
and freedom from discrimination, and call on Americans to refrain from 
discrimination of any sort?

    Answer. Yes.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Trevor Traina by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. I believe all humans have the right to freedom from tyranny 
and the opportunity to live their lives with freedom and respect. I 
recall being a child in California in the 70s and witnessing whole 
families at the airport waiting for loved ones to arrive from 
repressive countries to start new lives of freedom in the United 
States. It left a mark and taught me that not everyone enjoys the 
freedoms that we do. At Princeton I wrote my thesis on the treatment of 
the indigenous peoples of Alaska and the Alaska Native Claims 
Settlement Act, which was intended to correct for past wrongs. I serve 
as a trustee of San Francisco's Grace Cathedral which, along with 
Bishop William Swing, is a pioneer in religious freedom and in dialogue 
amongst the world's religions. My current company was designed to 
benefit people in need around the world with every single transaction 
we facilitate. We support over 200 different causes from the ACLU at 
home to educational groups in Nepal and everything in between. Beyond 
raising millions to help people globally, I feel our model of for-
profit commerce harnessed to support people in need is one that has 
wide-reaching application and represents a promising future.

    Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in 
Austria? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if 
confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Austria? What do 
you hope to accomplish through these actions?

    Answer. Austria has a strong record on human rights--we are 
important partners in addressing universal human rights challenges 
around the world based on the common values we share. The State 
Department's annual Human Rights and International Religious Freedom 
Reports list challenges Austria faces, including instances of 
discrimination against minority groups. There was a 97 percent increase 
in anti-Semitic incidents between 2014 and 2016, and a 62 percent 
increase in anti-Muslim incidents in 2016 over those reported in 2015. 
Jewish and Muslim groups have raised concerns about what they 
considered to be anti-Semitic and anti-Islamic sentiment within the 
Freedom Party (FPOe). If confirmed, I will continue our work advocating 
for increased tolerance for all.

    Question 3. 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 [country] in 
advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

    Answer. Human rights issues around the world often seem 
intractable, but Austria is a friend we can work with to address them. 
Austria and the United States share common values, including the 
importance of protecting human rights, though sometimes we have 
different areas of emphasis or different approaches to problems such as 
rising intolerance toward Jews, Muslims, and other religious or ethnic 
groups. If confirmed, I will continue our work with Austria to ensure 
the coordination of our efforts on promoting tolerance through civil 
society empowerment and coalition building. For example, we can work 
together on combatting hate crime and hate speech on line while 
preserving freedom of expression and religious freedom. Ensuring that 
we keep lines of communication open will maximize our joint impact on 
this and other challenges.

    Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in Austria? If confirmed, what steps will you 
take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and 
ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security 
cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

    Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with 
a broad spectrum of civil society in Austria, including human rights 
activists and religious groups, and the organizations that represent 
them. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department continues to 
thoroughly vet all individuals and units nominated to participate in 
U.S.-funded security assistance activities, in accordance with the 
Leahy law. If there are findings of credible information regarding 
gross violations of human rights, I would take the necessary steps in 
accordance with the law and Department policy, including working to 
ensure the responsible parties do not participate in U.S.-funded 
training.

    Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with 
Austria to address cases of key political prisoners or persons 
otherwise unjustly targeted by Austria?

    Answer. The State Department's 2016 Human Rights Report states that 
there were no reports of political prisoners in Austria.

    Question 6. Will you engage with Austria on matters of human 
rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

    Answer. If confirmed, I am committed to sustaining engagement with 
a broad spectrum of civil society in Austria, including human rights 
activists and religious groups, and the organizations that represent 
them. I also look forward to working closely and collaboratively with 
the USOSCE delegation on the ground in Vienna to address these issues.

    Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in Austria?

    Answer. None of my immediate family has economic interests in 
Austria. My cousin owns a home in Austria.

    Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when 
managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of 
creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote, 
mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and 
underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

    Answer. I currently run an extremely diverse company with more than 
50 percent women employees and a wide variety of ethnicities and 
orientations. I am proud of this and have worked hard to both mentor 
and nurture my team members. Good management takes time, listening 
skills, patience, and empathy. When people of various viewpoints and 
backgrounds feel empowered to work together, magical results ensue. If 
confirmed, I would bring this experience to the Mission.

    Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse 
and inclusive?

    Answer. Good management starts at the top, and if confirmed I would 
model to supervisors the kinds of behaviors I would want them to extend 
to their teams if confirmed. Good management also requires an open 
door, clear communication of goals and shared objectives, and I would 
work with my team to ensure that our shared environment is respectful 
and inclusive. If confirmed, I will ensure that projects with a scope 
for leadership and opportunities to excel are distributed equally among 
sections, people of different ranks, cones, experiences, and 
backgrounds, giving everyone an equal opportunity to make a difference 
in the Mission's impact on our foreign policy goals. I would also be 
respectful of work-life balance for all employees, recognizing that 
time at home with families is good for both employees' health and the 
health and productivity of an organization.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                Trevor Traina by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

    Question 1. In view of Austria's long-standing business connections 
to Russia, how committed do you believe Austria is to maintaining 
current EU sanctions on Russia in response to its annexation of Crimea? 
If confirmed, what will you do to encourage the Government to keep the 
sanctions in place for as long as necessary?

    Answer. Both Chancellor Kurz and Foreign Minister Kneissl have 
publicly said that they will support the EU consensus on EU sanctions 
on Russia. Maintaining U.S.-EU unity on Russia sanctions until Russia 
fully implements its Minsk commitments and returns Crimea to Ukraine is 
a top U.S. foreign policy priority in Austria. If confirmed, I will 
encourage the Austrian Government to maintain its support for EU-Russia 
sanctions as it has pledged to do, particularly once it assumes the EU 
presidency this July.

    Question 2. In December 2016, the Freedom Party, which is a member 
of the governing coalition, signed a cooperation agreement with 
Russia's Putin-backed United Russia Party. The agreement reportedly 
outlines plans for regular meetings and collaboration on economic, 
business, and political projects. What do you make of this agreement? 
In light of Russia's dismal record of behavior, which includes meddling 
in elections in the United States and elsewhere, how will you approach 
the broader issue of Austrian-Russian relations, if you are confirmed?

    Answer. Countering Russian malign influence is a top U.S. foreign 
policy priority. I am aware of the Freedom Party's cooperation 
agreement with United Russia from 2016. I understand that our embassy 
has expressed concern directly with Freedom Party leadership regarding 
this agreement and the party's history of supporting pro-Russian, anti-
American, anti-NATO policies. If confirmed, I will encourage the 
Austrian Government to continue its support for Western unity with 
respect to relations with Russia. Maintaining transatlantic unity until 
Russia changes its behavior is critical.

    Question 3. Austria is a highly-advanced industrialized country. If 
confirmed, what would you do to expand bilateral trade between our 
countries?

    Answer. Bilateral trade is an important part of our relationship 
with Austria. The United States is Austria's fourth-largest trading 
partner overall and its second largest export market with total two-way 
goods and services trade at approximately $19.1 billion in 2017 and 
U.S. exports to Austria in 2017 at $6.7 billion--up 16.0 percent from 
2016. If confirmed, I would continue to promote U.S. exports to Austria 
and encourage Austrian investment in the United States, particularly 
through the Embassy-supported SelectUSA program. I would use my 
entrepreneurial skills to help American companies realize export 
opportunities in Austria and showcase for Austrian companies the many 
opportunities to invest in the United States.

                               __________

                              NOMINATIONS

                              ----------                              


                        WEDNESDAY, MARCH 7, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:40 p.m. in Room 
SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Marco Rubio, 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Rubio [presiding], Gardner, Young, 
Cardin, Udall, Murphy, and Kaine.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MARCO RUBIO, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

    Senator Rubio. The Foreign Relations committee will come to 
order.
    Good afternoon. This is a nomination hearing for the 
Honorable Joseph Macmanus of New York, a career member of the 
Senior Foreign Service, class of minister-counselor, to be U.S. 
Ambassador to Colombia; Ms. Marie Royce of California to be an 
Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and Cultural 
Affairs; Ms. Robin Bernstein of Florida to be U.S. Ambassador 
to the Dominican Republic; and the Honorable Edward Charles 
Prado of Texas to be the U.S. Ambassador to Argentina.
    Before the ranking member and I make our remarks, we want 
to recognize our colleagues that are here and have other 
business as well to attend to but wanted to be here today. And 
so I would first recognize Senator John Cornyn of Texas who is 
here to introduce Judge Edward Prado.

                STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN CORNYN, 
                    U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

    Senator Cornyn. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman and members 
of the committee. It is an honor to be back before you and 
particularly to introduce my friend, Judge Ed Prado, who has 
been nominated by the President to be the U.S. Ambassador to 
the Argentine Republic.
    Judge Prado and I go back a long way when both of us served 
as judges in San Antonio, Texas. He was a little bit ahead of 
me as a State district court judge, but he went on to serve 
with distinction in the federal judiciary now for almost 35 
years. He has had an incredible career. The first 19 years, he 
served as a federal district judge and then on the Fifth 
Circuit Court of Appeals for 14 more. But he has been a public 
defender, U.S. attorney, a State district court judge, 
assistant district attorney. He has done a lot of different 
things.
    But for some in the audience who may not know the States of 
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas, for those States and the 
people who live there, Judge Prado and his colleagues on the 
Fifth Circuit have essentially been the supreme court since, as 
you know, only roughly 80 or so cases make their way to the 
United States Supreme Court.
    In his role for the Fifth Circuit, the judge was confirmed 
by the Senate unanimously, 97 to 0. It is no surprise that he 
was appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court to 
chair the Criminal Justice Active Review committee and serve on 
the board of the Federal Judicial Center, as well as other 
committees. Judge Prado is just a popular, sharp, and actually, 
once you get to know him, pretty funny guy. But I hope he does 
not show that part of his personality here today. [Laughter.]
    Senator Cornyn. He was first in his family to go to 
college. Judge Prado received his undergraduate law degrees 
from the University of Texas and grew up in a predominantly 
Latino neighborhood in west San Antonio, and he speaks fluent 
Spanish, which will come in handy, of course, in Argentina.
    I was surprised to learn that his family's history extends 
back to a Spanish soldier married at the Alamo in the 1700s.
    So one of the jokes about federal judges is that although 
they get lifetime tenure, sometimes it feels like a life 
sentence. And Ed and Maria are embarking on a new chapter in 
their lives, which I know must be exhilarating for them, and it 
is to our great benefit to have somebody of their distinction 
and their character representing the U.S. Government in 
Argentina.
    Although down in Argentina, he is going to have to remember 
that cowboys are gauchos, but Argentineans may be strangers to 
Bevo but they are no stranger to beef.
    So as the committee knows, Argentina has become an 
increasingly important country in South America. President 
Macri recently implemented a series of positive economic 
reforms that has literally turned that country around and 
eliminated some of the currency controls and reducing taxes on 
agricultural exports. And his broad election victory last fall 
indicates he will continue to enjoy broad support.
    So just as our relationship with Argentina has improved, it 
is really important that we have somebody of the character and 
talents and experience of Judge Prado representing the United 
States Government in that country as we work together to combat 
narcotics trafficking, money laundering, terrorist financing, 
corruption, and other illicit financial activities. We all 
share the concern, which I know the chairman particularly feels 
poignantly, the political concern over Venezuela. And recently 
our two Presidents agreed to launch a bilateral working group 
on cybersecurity issues.
    So the Argentine Republic is fortunate to have such a 
strong believer in democratic principles and the rule of law 
serve as the U.S. Ambassador.
    I thank you for your courtesies and letting me make this 
introduction and thank the President for making such an 
outstanding nomination. And I hope the committee will favorably 
report out his nomination.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you, Senator Cornyn.
    The senior Senator from Florida, Bill Nelson, to introduce 
Ms. Robin Bernstein.

                STATEMENT OF HON. BILL NELSON, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM FLORIDA

    Senator Nelson. And I might say also about Mrs. Royce--we 
well know her husband Ed. They have been frequent visitors to 
our State of Florida and have always been such gracious, 
gracious folks to Grace and to me.
    I want to particularly thank the two of you for your 
leadership. You are both very skilled, the chairman and the 
ranking member, in foreign affairs. I had the privilege of 
serving on this committee for a number of years.
    And I thought it important that since I have known Robin 
for a long time, the nominee for the DR, I wanted to come and 
tell you about her that her interest in public service started 
at a very early age. She even campaigned for Scoop Jackson and 
Hubert Humphrey. Now, please, Mr. Chairman, do not hold that 
against her.
    Senator Rubio. That is not in the file. I did not see that. 
[Laughter.]
    Senator Nelson. She even campaigned for me, Mr. Chairman. 
Please, do not hold that against her.
    And she worked for the Joint Economic committee and the 
Department of Commerce. And she has always had that spirit of 
public service.
    And let me tell you what she did in the aftermath of Puerto 
Rico. In a bipartisan way, she put together the Palm Beach 
County Cares organization that within just a few weeks of the 
hurricane in Puerto Rico, they delivered over 100 tons of 
supplies and they also helped to get clean water. And you know 
how desperate those folks are as they continue, many of them 
still without electricity this late in the day and potable 
water. That spirit of service and that proven ability to work 
in a bipartisan manner is going to make her a great ambassador.
    And so I have already congratulated her on the nomination, 
and I would like to see her confirmation fly through the 
Senate. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you, Senator Nelson. And I think I 
speak for the ranking member. We thank you for your 
compliments. You are free to come to all of our hearings and 
say that as well. [Laughter.]
    Senator Nelson. I just did that in a press conference with 
you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you for coming today.
    A member of our committee, Senator Udall of New Mexico, 
will be introducing Ms. Royce.

                 STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, 
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO

    Senator Udall. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I 
also just want to say what a pleasure it is working with you, 
Chairman Rubio and Ranking Member Senator Ben Cardin.
    My wife Jill and I have known Marie Royce for close to 20 
years when I began my service in the House of Representatives. 
Marie is a California native. Growing up in the West, she is 
active in conservation organizations and initiatives, and I 
believe she understands the important connection of those 
programs to international security and the rule of law.
    I also think her experience in educational and cultural 
affairs makes her a good fit for this important leadership 
role. Ms. Royce, a business woman and former professor, has 
been the CEO and principal of Marie Royce LLC in Fullerton, 
California since 2016. She has more than 30 years of experience 
in the private sector with Fortune 500 companies and as a small 
business owner creating and launching startups and new 
initiatives and serving as a key business liaison to 80 
countries. As a former educator and full-time university 
professor, Ms. Royce led an international grant program between 
two universities. She is a private sector appointee on the 
Advisory Committee on International Communications and 
Information Policy at the Department of State and has served on 
two U.S. cultural exchange boards. Marie served as an American 
Council of Young Political Leaders delegate to Hungary and 
Poland.
    Ms. Royce earned a bachelor's in science and business 
administration from California State Polytechnic University and 
a master's in business administration from Georgetown 
University.
    Her nomination has significant support within the 
diplomatic community. Patricia de Stacy Harrison served as 
Assistant Secretary for educational and cultural Affairs under 
President George H.W. Bush and Secretary of State Collin Powell 
and currently serves as CEO and President of Public 
Broadcasting. Ms. Harrison says--and I quote here--Marie 
Royce's experience, leadership, knowledge, and commitment to 
service will be of high benefit to our country and the 
Department of State and the Bureau of Educational and Cultural 
Affairs. End quote.
    Likewise, former Assistant Secretary for Educational and 
Cultural Affairs under President Clinton, Ann Stock, says--and 
I quote here--we are thrilled to see Marie Royce nominated for 
a key leadership role at State. She continues to share our 
vision for a more secure and prosperous world through the power 
of international exchange. End quote.
    Ms. Royce's experience, judgment, and temperament qualifies 
her for this important position within our diplomatic corps, 
and I wholeheartedly support her nomination and urge my 
colleagues to do so also.
    Thank you both and really great to be here with you.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    The three ambassadorial nominees, if confirmed, will be the 
face of America to the countries in which you will be serving, 
and your primary job, of course, is to communicate and execute 
the policies of the United States explaining to local 
populations what we are doing and why.
    The western hemisphere is a region vital to our national 
security and to our economy and one increasingly contested by 
foreign powers who have little to no interest in democracy or 
human rights or the rule of law. If we want the United States 
to remain free, prosperous, and secure, it starts in the 
western hemisphere. This is a contest that we cannot afford to 
lose and you will be on the front lines.
    As for the nominee to be Assistant Secretary of State for 
Educational and Cultural Affairs, if confirmed, you will be 
charged with one of America's most important foreign policy 
tools, the finest educational system in the world and a culture 
that is prevalent in nearly every corner of the planet.
    All four of these positions play an important role in U.S. 
foreign policy and I am pleased that all four of these 
nominations are here with us today.
    Let us begin with Colombia where we have a relationship 
that, in my view, is a poster child for what good U.S. foreign 
assistance can do. We have worked for decades now with the 
Colombian Government on a problem of mutual concern, the 
production and trafficking of drugs. The U.S.-Colombia 
initiative, Plan Colombia, is one of the most effective 
bilateral efforts that we have ever undertaken and is a model 
in this western hemisphere. The initiative's main goal was to 
reduce the supply of illegal drugs produced and exported by 
Colombia, but in addition, it helped the security of Colombia 
itself, the stability of its government and its governance. And 
as a result economic relations with Colombia have deepened 
throughout the years, and the U.S. remains Colombia's top 
trading partner. In short, this partnership has allowed the 
Colombian Government to intake billions of dollars in foreign 
assistance and in return has allowed them to invest it in ways 
which have been good for both countries.
    Today Colombia is a free and democratic nation. The rule of 
law is legitimate. It has one of the strongest and largest 
economies in the region, and it is among our strongest allies 
in the hemisphere, no longer just a recipient of support, but 
providing it themselves in places like Honduras.
    Still, it faces challenges, and given the internal and 
regional issues its government is facing, especially with 
narcotrafficking and the FARC, anyone under consideration for 
this position should demonstrate a deep understanding of the 
political, security, and economic climate, as well as the 
opportunities for the United States in partnership with 
Colombia and with the region at large.
    The Assistant Secretary of State for Educational and 
Cultural Affairs oversees some of the U.S. Government's most 
popular and prominent programs like Fulbright Scholars named 
after the longest serving chairman of this committee, William 
Fulbright, and exchange programs that expose people from all 
over the globe to America. These are soft power tools that 
could very well help decide whether this century is also an 
American one.
    The Dominican Republic and the United States have deep 
cultural ties, especially in my home State of Florida. 
According to Pew, Dominicans are the fifth largest Hispanic 
group in the United States with nearly 2 million in the year 
2015. It also happens to be a popular tourist destination for 
Americans, hosting upwards of 2 million Americans as tourists 
last year. Beyond personal and economic ties, the Dominican 
Republic finds itself at an important flashpoint for freedom in 
the region. The Dominican Republic is part of Petrocaribe, a 
group of countries that receive subsidized oil from a 
dictatorship in Venezuela. And if we want Venezuela to return 
to the prosperous constitutional democracy that its people 
deserve and that it was just a few decades ago, it is important 
for other democracies in the region, such as the Dominican 
Republic, to support the democratic aspirations and the human 
rights of their brothers and sisters in Venezuela in forums 
like the OAS and the United Nations.
    Argentina is the leader in South America that is recovering 
from years of poor economic leadership. President Macri's 
election has shown a commitment to stronger bilateral relations 
with the United States and a return to good governance, the 
rule of law, and free markets. The news yesterday of charges 
being brought against the former president Kirchner demonstrate 
just how precarious democracy can be and why we need to be on 
guard for cracks in our own democratic institutions and the 
democratic institutions in the region and throughout the world.
    So all of these positions will hold key roles in American 
foreign policy. And I begin at the outset by thanking you and 
your families for your commitment to your country and your 
willingness to serve it abroad.
    The ranking member.

             STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM MARYLAND

    Senator Cardin. Well, Chairman Rubio, first of all, thank 
you for convening this hearing. I appreciate it very much, and 
it is a pleasure to work with you in regards to the nomination 
for these four individuals.
    I also want to welcome you, thank you for your willingness 
to step forward in public service or continue in public 
service. It is not easy today. These are challenging times, and 
it is a great sacrifice to your privacy and for your families. 
So we thank you and we thank your families for being willing to 
serve our country. And we are pleased that so many of your 
family members could be present with us today as we go through 
this hearing.
    Marie Royce for Assistant Secretary for Educational and 
Cultural Affairs. Marie, you seem to have connections in a lot 
of States. You got a Florida endorsement. You got a New Mexico 
endorsement. You are from California, but you tell me you have 
ties to Maryland. So obviously, you know the country. So 
congratulations on so many different contacts, and you have an 
extremely impressive background, well known for your experience 
in business and your global engagements. So we thank you for 
being willing to take on this extremely important position to 
promote U.S. standing in the world and our democratic 
principles, our cultural ambassador cultivating global 
relationships.
    Let me just underscore the importance of this. When you 
look at the alumni clubs from these programs, you find many 
current and former heads of state. So this truly is America's 
gift to the international community and promoting our values, 
more important now than ever before when you see, for example, 
what is happening in the Philippines with President Duterte's 
use of extrajudicial killings in order to deal with the drug 
problem there and some kind comments sent by our President in 
regards to those methods. Believe me, we have challenges today 
and we need your help.
    I do want just to acknowledge that the administration's 
budget would cut your program by 75 percent. Now, we are not 
going to go along with that, but we need a friend to advocate 
with us so that you have the resources you need to carry out 
this very important assignment.
    And, Mr. Chairman, I might point out I am pleased that we 
have four nominees with us today, but I have to acknowledge 
that there are so many vacancies in the State Department, such 
a drain of the top seasoned diplomats that have not been filled 
that I am extremely concerned about the pace of the Trump 
administration's bringing to us nominees. I can assure you that 
we will work with the chairman and expedite all the nominees 
that are brought forward because we desperately need your 
presence in these areas.
    To Ambassador Macmanus, thank you for your career service. 
You have had an extremely impressive career, including being 
our representative in Vienna to the international 
organizations, including IAEA. That gives you a wealth of 
experience that you can take to Colombia.
    The implementation of the peace accords--Senator Blunt and 
I have worked with the Atlantic Council in regards to the 
implementation of the peace accords. There is a lot of interest 
in Congress, bipartisan interest.
    But one of the real challenges that we need to follow up 
and this committee is very interested in is accountability, to 
make sure there are no impunities as to the violations of human 
rights with the FARC and others that occurred during the 
longest civil war in our hemisphere. So we do want to make sure 
that the peace accords are entered into in the right way and 
that there is accountability for the human rights violations. 
We have to address the illicit coca cultivation. We know that. 
It is a major source of concern to us.
    And as the chairman pointed out with both Colombia and with 
Argentina, the impact of Venezuela is so noticeable, the impact 
on Colombia particularly on people trying to find life that 
cannot exist in Venezuela and the inability to deliver 
effectively humanitarian assistance to the people of Venezuela. 
All that will become part of the charge of our missions in 
Colombia and in Argentina.
    To Judge Prado, we had a chance to talk yesterday. You have 
had a very distinguished career and we thank you for your 
willingness. We do not normally get circuit court judges that 
are on their way to become ambassadors. But your experience is 
incredible and your commitment to public service is one that we 
all admire. So I just really wanted to thank you for being 
willing to take your talent to Argentina. It is our only major 
non-NATO ally in Latin America. This year they will host the G-
20, as we had a chance to talk about.
    And as I explained to you, we need to bring closure to the 
1994 bombing of the Jewish community center in Argentina. The 
cover-up here by the former government is one that cannot go 
unchallenged, and the United States needs to play a role to 
make sure that Argentina brings closure to that issue, holding 
those responsible accountable for that bombing.
    And I am concerned about the increased presence of China in 
Argentina. And it is one which we need to understand as we go 
forward, and our ambassador will play a very, very important 
role there.
    Mrs. Bernstein, you bring very impressive credentials in 
the business community, the philanthropic community. We thank 
you for your willingness to serve in a very important position.
    I will just make one observation, which is not your 
calling. I think President Trump makes it more difficult, and I 
am going to explain why. Many of us are concerned about the 
fact that President Trump never made full disclosures of his 
business interests, et cetera. We know that there are Trump 
organization activities within the Dominican Republic. And we 
just urge you to understand the sensitivity of maintaining the 
objectivity of the mission in the Dominican Republic, and we 
will be depending upon you to maintain that objectivity for the 
American people.
    Mr. Chairman, I look forward to our witnesses' testimony 
and to engaging them in some questions.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    We are going to begin our witness testimony. Your entire 
statement will be entered into the record. So if there is an 
abbreviated version, we are happy to hear anything you have to 
say, but in the interest of time--we have members coming in and 
out, and I know they want to ask questions. And so I would 
encourage you, if you can, to shorten the statements, if 
possible, so we can get right to the questions.
    Ms. Bernstein?

 STATEMENT OF ROBIN S. BERNSTEIN, OF FLORIDA, TO BE AMBASSADOR 
   EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED STATES OF 
               AMERICA TO THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC

    Ms. Bernstein. Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Cardin, 
distinguished members of the committee, I would first like to 
thank my longtime friend and esteemed Senator from Florida, 
Senator Bill Nelson, for his kind introduction.
    It is an honor to be with you today as President Trump's 
nominee to be the U.S. Ambassador to the Dominican Republic. If 
confirmed, it will be an honor to be the second woman to serve 
as U.S. Ambassador to this country. I am humbled that the 
President has entrusted me with this opportunity, with your 
approval, to represent the United States. If confirmed, I look 
forward to working with the White House, Secretary Tillerson, 
and our talented and dedicated staff to lead our engagement 
with such an important regional ally and partner.
    I would like to take this opportunity to thank my family 
who are with me today: my wonderful husband Richard; our 
children, Arthur, his wife Karla, Ariel, Alexandra, and Julia; 
and my mom Karolyn. I would also like to acknowledge my late 
father Archie whose lifelong passion was to host young exchange 
student ambassadors in our home and whose vision enabled me to 
go to high school in France as an exchange student and later to 
the School of International Service in Washington, D.C. My 
family has sustained me throughout the many challenges and 
opportunities in my life and without their support, I would not 
be able to undertake this next and exciting stage of my career.
    I began one of my first professional positions here on the 
Hill at the Joint Economic committee in this very building. 
After obtaining my MBA, I moved to Florida where I met my 
husband and where we raised our family.
    For over 3 decades, I have worked alongside my husband at 
our family insurance business in a number of leadership roles. 
During this time, I continuously worked in the nonprofit 
community in a wide variety of leadership positions, 
particularly in the areas of empowering and supporting women, 
health care issues, and supporting the underserved community. I 
am especially proud that as the cofounder of the bipartisan 
organization, Palm Beach County Cares, I helped facilitate the 
delivery of medicine and critically needed supplies to our 
fellow Americans in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands in 
the aftermath of devastating hurricanes.
    I am confident that my education and my experience in the 
public sector, private sector, and nonprofit worlds have 
prepared me for this important diplomatic mission. If confirmed 
as U.S. Ambassador, I will work closely with the personnel from 
across the Government to lead our embassy's efforts in forging 
stronger bonds with the Government and the people of the 
Dominican Republic.
    If confirmed, this appointment would be especially 
meaningful to me as a Jewish American. My grandfather, Morris 
Stein, fled Russia as a child with his family to escape 
religious discrimination. They came to the United States to 
pursue the American dream of religious freedom, human rights, 
democracy, and economic opportunity. That is why I am humbled 
to stand before you today and, if confirmed, pledge to continue 
the fight to preserve these American values.
    In the Jewish faith, we have a saying, ``When you save a 
life, you save the world.'' During World War II, the Dominican 
Government and its people opened their arms to thousands of 
Jews who were seeking refuge from the atrocities in Europe. 
Serving as Ambassador would be a personally significant way for 
me to show gratitude for how the people of the Dominican 
Republic cared for the Jewish people in their time of need.
    The Dominican Republic and the United States share a long 
history. As close neighbors, we also share a mutually 
beneficial economic, cultural, sports, and people-to-people 
ties enhanced by a very sizable Dominican American diaspora. If 
confirmed, I will work to ensure that trade opportunities 
continue to grow and deliver prosperity for both our nations 
and to ensure that our economic engagement will continue to 
benefit the United States.
    Over the years, the Dominican Republic has endured 
challenges to the health of its civil society. If confirmed, I 
pledge to continue to promote policies that advocate for the 
rule of law, strengthen democratic institutions, and tackle 
corruption.
    Fighting illicit trafficking and transnational crime is one 
of President Trump's highest priorities. The Dominican Republic 
is one of our strongest law enforcement partners in this 
hemisphere. Continued strong bilateral security cooperation 
will help attack the drug-related addiction and crime-related 
problems that affect both our countries.
    Finally, if confirmed, I will work tirelessly to facilitate 
humanitarian, cultural, and educational exchanges that reaffirm 
to the people of the Dominican Republic America's enduring 
foreign policy values of democracy, freedom, and human rights.
    Thank you very much for considering my nomination. I look 
forward to answering your questions.
    [Ms. Bernstein's prepared statement follows:]


                 Prepared Statement of Robin Bernstein

    Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Cardin, distinguished members of the 
committee, I would first like to thank my long-time friend and esteemed 
Senator from Florida, Senator Bill Nelson for his kind introduction.
    It is an honor to be with you today as President Trump's nominee to 
be the U.S. Ambassador to the Dominican Republic. If confirmed, it will 
be an honor to be the second woman to serve as U.S. Ambassador to this 
country. I am humbled that the President has entrusted me with the 
opportunity--with your approval--to represent the United States. If 
confirmed, I look forward to working with the White House, Secretary 
Tillerson, and our talented and dedicated staff to lead our engagement 
with such an important regional ally and partner.
    I would like to take this opportunity to thank my family who are 
with me today--my wonderful husband Richard, our children Arthur, his 
wife Karla, Ariel, Alexandra and Julia, and my mother Karolyn. I would 
also like to acknowledge my late father, Archie, whose lifelong passion 
was to host young exchange student ``ambassadors'' in our home and 
whose vision enabled me to go to high school in France as an exchange 
student and later to the School of International Service in Washington, 
D.C. My family has sustained me throughout the many challenges and 
opportunities in my life and without their support I would not be able 
to undertake this next and exciting stage of my career.
    I began one of my first professional positions here on the hill at 
the Joint Economic committee, in this very building. After obtaining my 
MBA, I moved to Florida where I met my husband and where we raised our 
family.
    For over three decades, I have worked alongside my husband at our 
family insurance business in a number of leadership roles. During this 
time, I continuously worked in the non-profit community in a wide 
variety of leadership positions, particularly in the areas of 
empowering and supporting women, health care issues and supporting the 
underserved community. I am especially proud that as the co-founder of 
the bipartisan organization Palm Beach County Cares, I helped 
facilitate the delivery of medicine and critically needed supplies to 
our fellow Americans in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands in the 
aftermath of devastating hurricanes.
    I am confident that my education, and my experiences in the public 
sector, private sector, and non-profit worlds have prepared me for this 
important diplomatic mission. If confirmed to serve as U.S. Ambassador, 
I will work closely with the personnel from across the Government to 
lead our embassy's efforts in forging stronger bonds with the 
Government and the people of the Dominican Republic.
    If confirmed, this appointment would be especially meaningful as a 
Jewish American. My grandfather, Morris Stein, fled Russia as a child 
with his family to escape religious discrimination. They came to the 
United States to pursue the American dream of religious freedom, human 
rights, democracy and economic opportunity. That is why I am humbled to 
stand before you today and, if confirmed, pledge to continue the fight 
to preserve these American values.
    In the Jewish faith we have a saying, ``When you save a life, you 
save the world.'' During World War II the Dominican Government and its 
people opened their arms to thousands of Jews who were seeking refuge 
from the atrocities in Europe.
    Serving as Ambassador would be a personally significant way for me 
to show gratitude for how the people of the Dominican Republic cared 
for the Jewish people in their time of need.
    The Dominican Republic and the United States share a long history. 
As close neighbors we also share mutually beneficial economic, 
cultural, sports and people-to-people ties enhanced by a very sizable 
Dominican-American diaspora. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that 
trade opportunities continue to grow and deliver prosperity for both 
our nations and to ensure that our economic engagement will continue to 
benefit the United States.
    Over the years, the Dominican Republic has endured challenges to 
the health of its civil society. If confirmed, I pledge to continue to 
promote policies that advocate for the rule of law, strengthen 
democratic institutions, and tackle corruption.
    Fighting illicit trafficking and transnational crime is one of 
President Trump's highest priorities. The Dominican Republic is one of 
our strongest law enforcement partners in the hemisphere. Continued 
strong bilateral security cooperation will help attack the drug-related 
addiction and crime related problems that affect both of our countries.
    Finally, if confirmed, I will work tirelessly to facilitate 
humanitarian, cultural, and educational exchanges that reaffirm to the 
people of the Dominican Republic, America's enduring foreign policy 
values of democracy, freedom, and human rights.
    Thank you very much for considering my nomination. I look forward 
to answering your questions.


    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Ms. Royce?

  STATEMENT OF MARIE ROYCE, OF CALIFORNIA, TO BE AN ASSISTANT 
    SECRETARY OF STATE FOR EDUCATIONAL AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS

    Ms. Royce. Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, 
distinguished members of the committee, thank you for inviting 
me here today.
    I would like to thank Senator Udall for his kind 
introduction.
    I want to thank President Trump and Secretary of State Rex 
Tillerson for their confidence in me, and if confirmed, it will 
be a privilege to represent you and the American people 
globally.
    I would like to thank Ed, my husband of 33 years, for his 
love and inspiration. And I would like to recognize my mother, 
Mary Barbara; my father-in-law, Ed Sr.; and my late father, 
Ronald Porter; and Aunt Peg. To my family and friends in 
California and my friends that are here today, I could not ask 
for better support.
    I am a passionate champion of people-to-people exchanges.
    Time and trust in ECA programs like Fulbright and the 
International Visitor Leadership Program have built important 
relationships. One in three current world leaders are alumni of 
U.S. Government exchange programs, so are over 500 former heads 
of state and 84 Nobel laureates.
    As a professor at California State Polytechnic University, 
Pomona, I participated in international exchange efforts 
through educating teachers and students from abroad. I saw the 
impact of our ideals, values, and policies on their world view 
and on their perception of U.S. foreign policy. Because of the 
prevalence of disinformation in many parts of the world, these 
ECA exchanges bring real world experiences in the United States 
that foster credibility and trust. These people-to-people ties 
are an important way to show that U.S. disagreement with a 
given regime overseas are with the Government of the country 
and not with the people. Thus, academic, cultural, and athletic 
exchanges cultivate mutual understanding as well as friendly 
and peaceful relations between the people of the United States 
and the people of other countries.
    In my time as a business executive in the 
telecommunications industry working in emerging markets in 
Africa, Europe, South America, and Asia, I obtained a deep 
appreciation of the role played by our educational programs. So 
often those I met in key decision-making roles had been the 
beneficiaries of ECA's bilateral agreements with foreign 
partners, governments, businesses, and NGOs. They had 
experienced the richness of America's political, economic, and 
cultural life. And as a result, they were very receptive to 
what America had to offer.
    As a delegate to Hungary and Poland in the American Council 
of Young Political Leaders, ACYPL, program, I experienced the 
effectiveness of these bipartisan programs. ACYPL promotes 
mutual understanding and cultivates long-lasting relationships 
among next generation leaders. It was an honor for me to later 
serve as secretary of the board.
    I served as a trustee of Meridian International, which 
works closely with the State Department and other U.S. 
Government agencies to provide exchange and policy programs 
that strengthen U.S. engagement with the world and prepares 
leaders to address complex global problems.
    My professional career began with the Procter & Gamble 
Company in sales management and research and development 
worldwide. At P&G, I helped create and launch a mentoring 
program for women and minorities to help close gender and 
racial gaps in the workplace and attract diverse talent.
    I raise this point because American diversity and the 
advances in opportunity for women and minorities in our society 
serve as an example for those struggling for full rights 
abroad. Prospects for empowerment, democracy, and the rule of 
law worldwide are advanced when young people can participate in 
our public diplomacy programs. Involvement of American and 
international participants from traditionally underrepresented 
groups create opportunities that are open to all. This 
inclusion is an American value and advances American interests. 
From creating programs at Cal Poly Pomona, P&G, and Marriott 
International to creating a program for Muslim women in 
Afghanistan and later Iraq, I have volunteered my time to those 
who have faced discrimination and lacked opportunities.
    As a private sector appointee on the Advisory Committee on 
International Communications and Information Policy at the 
Department of State, I developed long-distance mentoring 
programs.
    As noted by Senator Udall, I have more than 30 years of 
experience in the private sector and small business and as a 
full-time university professor.
    If confirmed, I would aim to strengthen our people-to-
people ties even further. I am very honored to be appointed to 
this important position, and I will focus all my efforts on 
improving the vital missions of these programs.
    Thank you very much.
    [Ms. Royce's prepared statement follows:]


                   Prepared Statement of Marie Royce

    Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Cardin, distinguished members of the 
committee, thank you for inviting me here today.
    I want to thank President Trump and Secretary of State Rex 
Tillerson for their confidence in me, and if confirmed--it will be a 
privilege to represent you and the American people globally.
    I would like to thank Ed, my husband of 33 years, for his love and 
inspiration. And I would like to recognize my mother Mary Barbara, my 
father-in-law Ed Sr., and my late father Ronald Porter and Aunt Peg. To 
my family and friends in California, I could not ask for better 
support.
    I am a passionate champion of people-to-people exchanges.
    Time and trust in ECA programs like Fulbright, and the 
International Visitor Leadership Program have built important 
relationships.

   One in three current world leaders are alumni of U.S. Government 
        exchange programs.
   So are over 500 former heads of state, and 84 Nobel Laureates.

    As a Professor at California State Polytechnic University, Pomona, 
I participated in international exchange efforts through educating 
teachers and students from abroad. I saw the impact of our ideals, 
values and policies on their world view, and on their perception of 
U.S. foreign policy. Because of the prevalence of disinformation in 
many parts of the world, these ECA exchanges bring real world 
experiences in the U.S. that fosters credibility and trust. These 
people-to-people ties are an important way to show that U.S. 
disagreement with a given regime overseas are with the Government of 
the country, not with the people. Thus academic, cultural and athletic 
exchanges cultivate mutual understanding as well as friendly and 
peaceful relations between the people of the United States and the 
people of other countries.
    In my time as a business executive in telecommunications working in 
emerging markets in Africa, Europe, South America and Asia, I obtained 
a deep appreciation of the role played by our educational programs. So 
often, those I met in key decision-making roles had been the 
beneficiaries of ECA's bilateral agreements with foreign partners, 
governments, businesses and NGOs. They had experienced the richness of 
America's political, economic, and cultural life. As a result, they 
were receptive to what America had to offer.
    As a delegate to Hungary and Poland in the American Council of 
Young Political Leaders (ACYPL) program, I experienced the 
effectiveness of these bi-partisan programs. ACYPL, promotes mutual 
understanding and cultivates long lasting relationships among next 
generation leaders. It was an honor for me to later serve as Secretary 
of the Board.
    I served as a Trustee of Meridian International, which works 
closely with the State Department and other U.S. Government agencies to 
provide exchange and policy programs that strengthen U.S. engagement 
with the world, and prepares leaders to address complex global 
problems.
    My professional career began with Procter & Gamble in sales 
management, and research and development world-wide. At P&G, I helped 
create and launch a mentoring program for women and minorities to help 
close gender and racial gaps in the workplace, and attract diverse 
talent.
    I raise this point because American diversity, and the advances in 
opportunity for women and minorities in our society serve as an example 
for those struggling for full rights abroad. Prospects for empowerment, 
democracy and the rule of law worldwide are advanced when young people 
can participate in our public diplomacy programs. Involvement of 
American and international participants from traditionally 
underrepresented groups create opportunities that are open to all.
    This inclusion is an American value, and advances American 
interests. From creating mentoring programs at Cal Poly Pomona, P&G, 
and Marriott International, to creating a program for Muslim women in 
Afghanistan and later Iraq, I have volunteered my time to those who 
have faced discrimination and lacked opportunities.
    As a private sector appointee on the Advisory Committee on 
International Communications and Information Policy (ACICIP) at the 
Department of State, I developed long-distance mentoring programs 
through video-conferencing and SKYPE for women in the developing world 
to match them up with women professionals.
    I have more than 30 years of experience in the private sector with 
Fortune 500 Companies, and as a small business owner, creating and 
launching start-ups and new initiatives and serving as a key business 
liaison to 80 countries. As a former full-time university professor I 
led an international grant program between two universities.
    If confirmed, I would aim to strengthen our people-to-people ties 
even further. I am honored to be appointed to this important position, 
and I will focus all my efforts on improving the vital mission of these 
programs. Thank you very much, and I look forward to answering your 
questions.


    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Ambassador Macmanus?

  STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH E. MACMANUS, OF NEW YORK, A CAREER 
    MEMBER OF THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-
 COUNSELOR, TO BE AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY 
  OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA

    Ambassador Macmanus.. Thank you, Senator. Mr. Chairman and 
Mr. Ranking Member, members of the committee, it is an honor to 
appear here today as the President's nominee for U.S. 
Ambassador to the Republic of Colombia. If confirmed, I am 
committed to representing the President, the American people, 
and their national interests in a country so key to our 
security and prosperity in the western hemisphere.
    I would like to thank first my wife Carol and our son Chris 
for their support during my 32-year career in the Foreign 
Service. Without that support, I would not be here today.
    Mr. Chairman, Colombia has transformed itself.
    Mr. Chairman, I find myself particularly challenged by the 
fact that your introduction and the ranking member's 
introduction on Colombia were a perfect articulation of our 
policy. It is a representation of the bipartisan nature of that 
support over the past 20 years. And I would be happy to read my 
abbreviated statement, but I would prefer, in fact, to, in the 
Senate tradition, associate myself with those remarks and leave 
myself available for a full set of questions. It is a well 
known account. It is one that we all understand, and I look 
forward to talking to you about it.
    If confirmed, I plan on representing our country fully and 
in a fashion that would continue the progress that we have made 
under Plan Colombia.
    [Ambassador Macmanus's prepared statement follows:]


                Prepared Statement of Joseph E. Macmanus

    Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the committee, I come 
before you today, both honored and humbled, to be considered to 
represent the United States as the President's nominee for U.S. 
Ambassador to the Republic of Colombia. I feel honored by the prospect 
of serving our country in this role and, if confirmed, I am committed 
to representing the President, the American people, and their national 
interests in a country so key to our security and prosperity in the 
Western Hemisphere.
    I would like to thank my wife and son, for supporting my 32-year 
career in the Foreign Service. Without your continued support I would 
not be here today.
    Mr. Chairman, as the Members of this body know, our relationship 
with Colombia represents for both of our countries the full scope of 
opportunities and challenges that face our hemisphere and the world.
    In spite of a well-known history of violence and instability, 
Colombia has transformed itself over the last two decades into a sturdy 
democracy of growing and maturing institutions with a dynamic market 
economy and a society brimming with optimism and hope for the future. 
Violent capital crime has decreased dramatically and the peace accord 
offers a way forward after one of the world's longest running civil 
wars. Colombia has chosen a new path.
    In these respects, the United States has no more capable and 
disposed partner in the region than Colombia, and Colombia has no more 
reliable and steady partner than the United States. This partnership 
has flourished under Plan Colombia, which has provided a platform for 
our support and cooperation to evolve as Colombia has matured. The 
support of the U.S. Congress remains vital to the health and momentum 
of this relationship.
    At the heart of this cooperation is an urgent bilateral challenge, 
but this should not detract from the many positive aspects and values 
of our relationship. Colombia remains the single largest cultivator of 
coca in the world, the single largest producer of cocaine in the world, 
and the single largest trafficker of cocaine into the United States. By 
U.S. estimates, over 90 percent of cocaine brought to the United States 
originates in Colombia.
    In my brief remarks this afternoon, I want to address the strategic 
purpose of U.S. continued support for Colombia, the means by which we 
can advocate our interests, and address the question of how to cap the 
growth of coca cultivation and return to the progress of previous years 
when there was diminishing production and trafficking of cocaine.
    The United States, including both the administration and the 
Congress, has stated plainly its deep concern about the surge in coca 
cultivation and cocaine production. It is a topic of continuing 
discussion with and within the Colombian Government.
    Our commitment over the past two decades to work side-by-side with 
Colombia to address the issue has produced encouraging results. Over 
this period, with a combination of training, tools, and technical 
skills provided through U.S. assistance, the Colombian security forces 
have made serious and increasingly effective efforts to address 
narcotics trafficking and transnational organized criminals and their 
networks.
    In the past 12 months in bilateral meetings here in Washington and 
in high-level visits to Colombia, President Trump, Vice President 
Pence, Secretary of State Tillerson, and numerous other government 
officials have impressed on the Colombian Government the urgency with 
which they must do more to combat the tremendous growth in coca 
cultivation. The Colombians in turn have developed a wide range of new 
policies and programs to address the issue, and they continue to take 
losses in their security forces on a weekly basis fighting drug 
traffickers and their networks. Colombia is fully engaged in this 
fight.
    Coca cultivation presents challenges to Colombia across every 
aspect of its governance and society. It damages families and 
communities through dangerous arrangements with traffickers, 
transnational criminal organizations, and guerrillas, resulting in 
killings, displacements, and corruption of individuals and government 
officials. It threatens public health and the environment, especially 
in the production phases of cocaine. It subverts licit economic 
development through the illusion of illicit cultivation as a realistic 
plan for subsistence or profit. It creates illegal money flows 
throughout the region, further leading to corruption and stunting the 
ability of the criminal justice system to function untainted with 
devastating effects throughout the illicit supply chain to the United 
States.
    Such a pervasive set of threats requires an integrated, whole-of-
government approach to counternarcotics and rural development in the 
strategic areas of concern. This approach characterizes the 
implementation of the peace accord related to illicit drugs, rural 
reform, and justice for victims.
    The United States is supporting the Colombian Government's efforts 
across Colombia, in Tumaco, in Antioquia, and elsewhere. Working with 
national, state and municipal governments, the private sector, civil 
society, and public forces, the Colombian Government is beginning to 
bring security and economic opportunities to areas of the country 
previously under-served and unsafe. Ending the scourge of narcotics 
trafficking that has destroyed so many Colombian and American families 
is an imperative for our relationship, for Colombia's future, and for 
the success of the peace accord's implementation. In the recently 
concluded U.S.-Colombia High Level Dialogue, Colombia committed to 
reducing Colombia's cocaine production and cultivation to 50 percent of 
current levels by 2023.
    If confirmed, I will be a strong and active supporter of this goal. 
Over the past five years, U.S. efforts in four of the top coca 
producing regions of the country have supported more than 35,000 
families while leveraging more than $265 million in public and private 
resources. In FY 16, USAID programs directly supported over 1,800 small 
businesses and 14,000 small-scale farmers of coffee, cacao, milk, and 
honey through 45 producer associations and groups creating licit 
economies and jobs in the rural sector.
    U.S. efforts to boost licit economic opportunities, develop and 
improve key infrastructure, and confront criminal activities, including 
narcotics production and related criminal activities, marks the next 
chapter in this fight. The United States and Colombia, working side by 
side, can assist communities affected by decades of conflict and 
narcotics trafficking through the implementation of the peace accord.
    But our relationship with Colombia is not just about drugs. 
Colombia is also an important trade partner for the United States, 
underscored by the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (CTPA) that 
has supported economic growth and employment opportunities in both 
countries. Colombia is America's 25th largest trading partner, with 
two-way trade in 2017 amounting to $26.82 billion. It is notably one of 
the most balanced trading relationships in the world, with only a $282 
million trade deficit for the United States, something I will work on 
if confirmed.
    We support Colombia's accession to the Organization for Economic 
Cooperation and Development (OECD) once it completes all the technical 
requirements for entry. In support of this we are providing Colombia 
with $2 million in assistance to improve labor practices and 
encouraging Colombia to meet its U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion 
Agreement obligation to protect intellectual property rights, which 
will also deter transnational criminal organizations.
    The United States also wants to see full implementation of new 
regulations to ensure market access for U.S. companies and full 
compliance with the U.S.-Colombia Free Trade Agreement and Labor Action 
Plan.
    The educational ties between our countries also continue to grow. 
With substantial government investment from the United States and 
Colombia, together with private sector collaboration, our joint 
innovation fund has awarded nearly 30 grants in the last three years to 
teams of Colombian and U.S. academic institutions to build 
institutional capacity and create new exchange and training programs.
    We encourage collaboration to support language and teacher training 
that strengthen educational and economic opportunities. Access to 
quality education is key to promoting racial and ethnic equality. 
Empowering persons of African and indigenous descent, women, and other 
underrepresented communities through education strengthens society as a 
whole and promotes economic opportunities for all.
    We have had excellent cooperation with the Government of Colombia 
through the U.S.-Colombia Action Plan on Racial and Ethnic Equality to 
improve access to education, entrepreneurship, and employment 
opportunities for Afro-Colombians and indigenous communities and 
explore ways to promote inclusive policies and programs for both 
countries.
    Exchange programs between the United States and Colombia are 
uniquely able to reach young people and create new economic 
opportunities in both countries and these will continue.
    Finally, Mr. Chairman, I will say a few words about myself. I am a 
senior member of the U.S. Foreign Service, having served over 30 years 
at home and abroad. My experience includes work in Latin America and 
Europe. I served as our ambassador to the International Atomic Energy 
Agency and for many years worked closely as a senior aide to four 
Secretaries of State. I have a detailed knowledge of the importance of 
the Department of State's relationship with Congress and I respect and 
value the views of its Members and the nature of their oversight. I am 
committed to and, if confirmed, will maintain strong ties with the 
Members of this committee, many of whom have deep experience on these 
issues, productive relationships with Colombians in government and 
civil society, visit the country often, and offer measured and wise 
views on the problems Colombia faces.
    Mr. Chairman, we share a common purpose. Colombia continues its 
struggle to create the future it has worked so diligently to achieve 
for nearly two decades. Many of its most serious challenges, especially 
the twin challenges of consolidating peace and controlling drug 
trafficking, are deep seated and frankly the work of a generation. But 
Colombians are committed to picking up the pace. And if confirmed, I am 
committed to continuing the fine work of my predecessors and honoring 
the tremendous sacrifice of Colombians in this shared struggle. If 
confirmed, I will support and defend our policies, our interests, and 
represent the President and the American people as their voice and 
advocate.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to responding to your 
questions.


    Senator Rubio. Yes. Senator Cardin makes the point that 
anytime your statement--basically as you agree with what we 
have to say, it is always a good sign. But that is just our 
opinion. [Laughter.]
    Ambassador Macmanus.. I got lucky, Senator.
    Senator Rubio. All right. Judge Prado, do you agree with us 
too? [Laughter.]

    STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD CHARLES PRADO, OF TEXAS, TO BE 
  AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED 
          STATES OF AMERICA TO THE ARGENTINE REPUBLIC

    Mr. Prado. 101 percent. I think that Mr. Macmanus should 
have checked with the rest of us on the panel as to whether he 
should have cut his statement short because I think the rest of 
us would have preferred that it be longer. [Laughter.]
    Mr. Prado. Mr. Chairman Rubio, Ranking Member Cardin, and 
other members of the committee, including Senator Kaine who is 
here--and I will acknowledge him--thank you for the opportunity 
to appear before you this afternoon.
    And I also wish to thank my good friend, Senator Cornyn. We 
go back a very, very long way when we were both young lawyers. 
We have an informal agreement that if I do not tell stories on 
him, he will not tell stories on me. So I will leave it at that 
and thank him for being here today and introducing me to the 
committee.
    It is an honor to appear before you today as the 
President's nominee to be the United States Ambassador to the 
Argentine Republic. I must say it is a rather awkward position 
for me because as an appellate judge, I am used to being the 
one behind the bench and asking the questions and controlling 
the little red lights and light traffic. So it is a little 
different situation for me today, but be that as it may, I hope 
to assure you that my career as a judge, my work ethic, my 
resolve make me well qualified to be America's voice in 
Argentina.
    I thank President Trump for his confidence in me and for 
this opportunity. And I thank Secretary Rex Tillerson for 
supporting my nomination.
    I am here today with my wife of 44 years Maria. She has 
been my strongest supporter throughout my life and our marriage 
and in this new endeavor. She understands that there is an 
important role for the spouse of an ambassador and she is eager 
to take on that responsibility. We are a team, and she is 
coming with me as part of my team.
    Our son Edward could not join us today, but he is very 
enthusiastic about this opportunity for his father. And I think 
he would rather save his money for possible trips further south 
than to come up here to D.C. today.
    I would also like to acknowledge some of my former law 
clerks that are in the audience. As a judge for many years, I 
have had the opportunity to hire young, bright lawyers from 
various law schools throughout the country, and they have been 
part of what they call Team Prado. And I wish to thank them for 
appearing here today with me.
    My career has prepared me well for this new responsibility. 
As a federal judge, I listened, I gathered information, I 
analyzed it carefully, and ultimately had the responsibility to 
make difficult decisions. I understood that with the title of 
judge came power and respect. But with that power and with that 
respect also came a responsibility to do what the law demanded 
regardless of the consequences. Likewise, the title of 
ambassador carries with it a great deal of prestige, but with 
that prestige also comes great responsibility to represent the 
United States of America. My goal will be to earn the respect 
that comes with the title of ambassador and to represent our 
country to be best of my ability.
    I also realize that while I might serve as the face of the 
court, there are dozens of persons behind the scenes that make 
the courts function properly. The same is true of an embassy. 
While I might be the face of the embassy, I understand that 
there is a team and many dedicated employees behind the scenes 
making sure that America is properly represented. An embassy is 
only as strong as those who make it function from the 
Ambassador to the consular section to the people working in the 
cafeteria. We are a team working together with the same goals, 
the same mission.
    I have had the opportunity to travel to Argentina on 
numerous occasions. I have made presentations and participated 
in workshops across Argentina and have made friends among the 
Argentine legal community. I know how important the rule of law 
is and how important a strong independent judicial branch can 
be to a country if it is to be a solid democracy. My intent is 
to continue working with the lawyers and the judges of 
Argentina in improving the judicial system and strengthening 
the confidence the people have in the judicial system.
    As a former prosecutor, I appreciate the efforts of our law 
enforcement agencies to make our country and the world a safer 
place for all citizens. It is my intent to fully support United 
States law enforcement agency efforts in supporting Argentine 
law enforcement and their fight against crime. I am committed 
to help build capacity within the Argentine police to promote 
security in a vital regional ally.
    As a son of a World War II veteran and myself a retired 
Army reservist, I appreciate the importance of a strong 
military commitment to a democratic world free from the threat 
of terrorism. Our support of the Argentine military must 
continue.
    I also hope to work closely on commercial and economic 
issues to increase opportunities for United States business in 
Argentina. I will work to further enhance our bilateral trade 
relationship. Argentina is the eighth largest country in the 
world by land area and has a powerful and diverse economy. 
While the country has no doubt dealt with its share of economic 
challenges, the current Macri administration has established 
wide-reaching reforms seeking to strengthen Argentina's markets 
and its position in the global economic community. I intend to 
work closely with the Argentine administration to not only 
assist them in these efforts but to strengthen mutuality 
between beneficial trade and commerce of our two countries.
    I look forward to enhancing our continuing friendship and 
partnership with a close ally. Through our efforts, we can 
strengthen peace and prosperity in both countries, and I look 
forward to representing the United States on the global stage.
    I welcome your questions.
    [Mr. Prado's prepared statement follows:]


              Prepared Statement of Judge Edward C. Prado

    Members of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, It is an honor 
to appear before you today as the President's nominee to be the United 
States Ambassador to the Argentine Republic. I must say it is a rather 
awkward position for me because as an appellate judge I am used to 
being the one behind the bench asking the questions rather answering 
them. Be that as it may, I hope to assure you that my career as a 
judge, my work ethic, and my resolve make me well qualified to be 
America's voice in Argentina. I thank President Trump for his 
confidence in me and for this opportunity. And I thank Secretary Rex 
Tillerson for supporting my nomination.
    I am here today with my wife of 44 years, Maria. She has been my 
strongest supporter throughout my life and in this new endeavor. She 
understands that there is an important role for the spouse of an 
Ambassador and is eager to take on that responsibility. We are a team. 
Our son, Edward could not join us today but is very enthusiastic about 
this opportunity for his father.
    My career has prepared me well for this new responsibility. As a 
federal judge I listened, I gathered information, I analyzed it 
carefully, and ultimately had the responsibility to make difficult 
decisions. I understood that with the title of judge came power and 
respect. But with that power and respect also came a responsibility to 
do what the law demanded regardless of the consequences.Likewise, the 
title of Ambassador carries with it a great deal of prestige, but with 
that prestige also comes a great responsibility to represent the United 
States of America. My goal will be to earn the respect that comes with 
the title of Ambassador and to represent our country to the best of my 
ability.
    I also realize that while I might serve as the face of the court, 
there are dozens of persons behind the scenes that make sure that the 
court functions smoothly. The same is true of an Embassy. While I might 
be the face of the Embassy, I understand that we are a team and many 
dedicated employees are behind the scenes making sure that America is 
properly represented. An embassy is only as strong as those who make it 
function, from the Ambassador to the consular section, to the people 
working in the cafeteria; we are a team working together with the same 
goals, the same mission.
    I have had the opportunity to travel to Argentina on numerous 
occasions. I have made presentations and participated in workshops 
across Argentina and have made friends among the Argentine legal 
community. I know how important the rule of law is and how important a 
strong, independent judicial branch can be to a country if it is to be 
a solid democracy. My intent is to continue working with the lawyers 
and judges of Argentina in improving the judicial system and 
strengthening the confidence the people have in the judicial system.
    As a former prosecutor, I appreciate the efforts of our law 
enforcement agencies to make our country and the world a safer place 
for all citizens. It is my intent to fully support United States law 
enforcement agency efforts in supporting Argentine law enforcement and 
their fight against crime. I am committed to helping build capacity 
within the Argentine police to promote security in a vital regional 
ally.
    As a son of a World War II veteran and myself a retired Army 
reservist, I appreciate the importance of a strong military and our 
commitment to a democratic world free from the threat of terrorism. Our 
support of the Argentine military must continue.
    I also hope to work closely on commercial and economic issues to 
increase opportunities for U.S. business in Argentina. I will work to 
further enhance our bilateral trade relationship. Argentina is the 
eighth largest country in the world by land area, and has a powerful 
and diverse economy. While the country has no doubt dealt with its 
share of economic challenges, the current Macri administration has 
established wide-reaching reforms seeking to strengthen Argentina's 
markets and its position in the global economic community. I intend to 
work closely with the Argentine administration to not only assist them 
in these efforts but to strengthen mutually beneficial trade and 
commerce between our two nations.
    I look forward to enhancing our continuing friendship and 
partnership with a close ally. Through our efforts, we can strengthen 
peace and prosperity in both countries and I look forward to 
representing the United States on the global stage.
    I welcome your questions.


    Senator Rubio. Thank you all for being here.
    I am going to just question one of the nominees and then 
turn it over to our members. And then I will be able to remain 
and continue on our work.
    But I wanted to start with Ambassador Macmanus, who served 
as executive assistant to Secretary Rice and then Secretary 
Clinton in particular during 2012 when we experienced the 
terrible terrorist attack at our diplomatic compound in 
Benghazi. And a number of members not just on the committee but 
off it have raised questions about this period of time, and so 
I wanted to give you an opportunity to address it in this 
committee.
    Let me begin by just asking you, when did you know that the 
attacks were terrorism and not related to anti-American 
protests, and when did you first inform the Secretary of State 
of that fact?
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Senator, thank you. I am going to try 
and answer that in the correct order.
    I first learned of the attack when it was reported from the 
diplomatic security command center to our operations center, 
and they in turn contacted me to let me know that there had 
been an attack or that there was an attack underway.
    To identify when I had knowledge that it was a terrorist 
attack is a different arc. My response initially--and all of my 
communications were internal and intended only to inform people 
as required to understand what the Secretary's whereabouts were 
and what the Secretary was addressing at that particular 
moment. And this was over the course of several hours in the 
afternoon and into the evening. I used the term ``terrorist 
attack'' because that is what I judged it to be. It was not a 
legal determination. It was not based on an a mass of evidence 
or analysis. It was the term that I used to describe what I saw 
taking place.
    Senator Rubio. When did you first inform the Secretary of 
State?
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Well, I would say within minutes. It 
was approximately 3:30, 3:20, if I am not mistaken, in the 
afternoon when I informed the Secretary that this was underway 
and that we were monitoring what exactly was taking place.
    Senator Rubio. One more question and again to give you the 
opportunity to answer. Did you ever purposely mislead or 
advocate for misleading the American public about the nature of 
the attack?
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Never, Senator. Never.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Senator Cardin?
    Senator Cardin. Judge Prado, you and I had a chance to talk 
about the use of your talents in the legal system to deal with 
the problem in Argentina from the 1994 bombing of the Jewish 
community center. I just really want to get on the record here 
our concern that that matter be of high priority to our 
mission, that there be justice in regards to what happened and 
any cover-up that was engaged by the Government.
    Mr. Prado. Yes, sir, Senator. I am encouraged that the 
present administration has refocused its investigation on those 
horrible terrorist attacks. We share, unfortunately, that with 
Argentina that our country too has been attacked by terrorist, 
and many people were killed and injured. The administration is 
going forward with investigations not only about the bombings 
that took place but also the killing, murdering, death of 
Alberto Nisman, who was a special prosecutor that was 
investigating the case, and that mysterious death. And I hope 
to get down there and help the process in any way I can with 
regard to any assistance that we might provide whether it be as 
prosecutors or assistance to the judicial process.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you for that. There is at least some 
indication that there were foreign interests involved in that 
attack and that there may have been governmental cover-up as to 
the investigation. So that, obviously, is a matter of grave 
concern.
    Mr. Prado. Yes. I would like to encourage the Iranian 
Government to cooperate in the investigation and assist in the 
investigation.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you.
    Ms. Bernstein, I am sure you are aware of the 2013 decision 
of the Dominican Constitutional Court that stripped hundreds of 
thousands of Dominicans of Haitian descent of their nationality 
rending them stateless. These are people who for a long time 
have lived in the DR, and the Constitutional Court has now 
declared that they have no citizenship, that they are literally 
stateless.
    What would be your approach to ensuring that these 
individuals have their nationality restored?
    Ms. Bernstein. Thank you, Senator, for that very important 
question.
    Humanitarian rights are very, very important to me, 
especially as someone whose family fled Russia because of the 
lack of respect for human rights. So this is something that is 
deeply engrained in my soul. And this is a question that is 
very, very important to me.
    First of all, I agree with you that human rights should be 
respected. Even Pope John Paul said that everyone--if I may 
quote--everyone should have the opportunity to eat enough, to 
be cared for when ill, to find housing, to study to overcome 
illiteracy, to find worthwhile and properly paid work, all that 
provides a truly human life for men and women young and old.
    And I would take a very active role in working with our 
embassy staff. I understand that this is something that we do, 
if confirmed, that we work to help them gain passports. And I 
would, hopefully, work with my esteemed colleague, Ambassador 
Michele Sison, in Haiti and try and work with her should there 
be any issues where we could partner together and try to make 
sure that the restoration of the people that are, quote, 
stateless----
    Senator Cardin. And I would ask that you keep this 
committee informed on that process. These individuals basically 
have been there for long periods of time. There is no other 
country that they belong, but because their language is 
slightly different, they have been discriminated against by DR. 
And we would just ask that you make this a priority to keep us 
engaged on this subject.
    Ms. Bernstein. Absolutely, and if confirmed, I can assure 
you that I look forward to working with you to assure that this 
will happen. And I look forward to staying engaged with you on 
this issue.
    Senator Cardin. Ms. Royce, I really appreciated your 
testimony. It was almost as good as Ambassador Macmanus' 
testimony. [Laughter.]
    Senator Cardin. I really appreciated the way you talked 
about the exchanges and American values and the impact it has 
had because I agree with everything you just said. And human 
rights is a priority of this committee. It is one of my top 
priorities. American values to me are our strength. And we have 
got to be pretty clear about it. It is being challenged today. 
It is not easy. There are a lot of concerns about whether 
America still maintains that global position as it relates to 
our traditional values. And I just want you to know that there 
is a lot of support by both Democrats and Republicans in 
Congress to make sure that your role is clear that America's 
strength are our values and that we want you to have the tools 
you need to continue these exchanges to promote I would say 
universal values, American values, as you move forward where 
there are going to be challenges because of the current issues 
that are before America and before the global community.
    So will you be open and frank with us as to how we can 
help?
    Ms. Royce. Thank you, Senator. First of all, I want to say 
thank you for your thoughtful comment and your willingness to 
help.
    What I would like to share that you stated was how 
important exchange programs are as far as that valued aspect of 
America's international leadership. As you know and you 
mentioned in your statement about resources, and I want to 
assure you that, if confirmed, that any level of resources--I 
am going to utilize my skills coming from the private sector 
where I managed with challenging budgets oftentimes. And I am 
going to leverage the assets of the ECA, and that includes the 
experts at the State Department, our resources, and you 
mentioned the alumni. That is really important.
    In addition to that, I am going to marshal the resources 
against our highest public policy priorities for foreign 
policy.
    So I will just say that I am going to welcome your feedback 
and be open to it. Anyway that we can make any improvements to 
enhance and improve our public policy--I would welcome that.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you.
    With your indulgence, Mr. Chairman, I just want to ask 
Ambassador Macmanus in regards to the peace process in Colombia 
and the reconciliation that is critically important, that the 
terms of the peace agreements as it relates to those that have 
violated human rights, that they are held accountable are 
consistent with the peace agreements. There are 
responsibilities on both sides. And what I find, that when 
peace agreements are entered into, the human rights component 
sometimes gets left on the table as far as enforcement is 
concerned because it is not considered to be of equal priority 
to the other provisions in the peace accord. I would ask that 
that needs to be of highest priority, and the U.S. mission can 
play a major role to make sure that in fact is carried out.
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Senator, I would comment briefly on 
that.
    First, I think that the peace accords themselves have woven 
into them an understanding that the repair that needs to be 
done to the social fabric in that country is part and parcel of 
both the scourge of illegal narcotics and the response to that 
scourge in the peace accord and following, which is the 
introduction of state presence, of state institutions in areas 
that have traditionally not seen investment and participation 
by the state, one, for security reasons initially but, 
secondly, because they are areas that are in need of growth and 
many of them, in fact, line up with areas of the country where 
indigenous populations or Afro-Colombian populations are 
prevalent.
    So the key word, as you said, is ``accountability,'' 
accountability for crimes and then an accountability to resolve 
part of the underlying causes for the state being in the woeful 
condition it was in when we first went forward with Plan 
Colombia. Human rights must be a part of that. And we have seen 
reactions from the Colombian Government in terms of providing 
greater protection to labor leaders and human rights defenders. 
It is still a problem, and it is going to be over the course of 
the generation that makes changes in Colombia that will build 
out, I think, the institutions of Colombian governance that 
will provide the most important protections.
    Senator Rubio. Senator Kaine?
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    And congratulations to each of you. This is a very well 
qualified panel for the positions that you have been nominated 
for. I appreciate your willingness to serve.
    If I could ask you, Mr. Macmanus, quickly. We were talking 
in the back room and I was saying similar things. A lot of 
times we wonder whether the effect of American foreign policy 
is positive. We try hard. We have good motivations. We invest a 
lot. Often, despite all of those things, we get involved in 
other countries and we are not happy with the outcomes, and 
then that makes people question whether we should make the 
effort at all.
    But Colombia is a perfect example of a careful and adroit 
and sustained investment between administrations and Congresses 
of both parties that has really been transformative. We have 
seen Colombia go from kind of a near failed state to a 
wonderful economic and security partner for the United States, 
a leader in its region. I remember going to visit the 
multinational force of observers that patrols and provides 
peace in the Sinai on the border between Egypt and Israel. And 
Colombia is a major participant in that peacekeeping operation, 
as they are in others. And so there is a lot at stake at this 
point in making sure that progress continues.
    One of the issues I know that Colombia is very interested 
in--and I wanted to get your take on it--is Colombia's desire 
to be part of the OECD. So I would like to hear your thought 
about whether Colombia seems to be on track to meet benchmarks 
for ascension to the OECD and what are the obstacles that 
remain and then what more could the United States do to be an 
ally in that effort.
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Thank you, Senator.
    Colombia's desire and, in fact, ambition to become part of 
OECD, to join in a community of nations that believe in 
normative standards and are willing to prove that they are 
capable of it is a great sign that they are prepared to move 
forward.
    Our trade relationship with them now has as its framework a 
trade cooperation agreement, which has resulted in a fairly 
good trade balance. It is one of the best in the world, a trade 
in goods of about $23 billion a year. It varies depending upon 
a number of factors. But also both the trade agreement and the 
desire to join OECD has provided an impetus for a continuation 
in progress on standards, on labor standards, on resolving 
conflicts that exist that have to do with protection of 
intellectual property, the access to the market of U.S. 
companies.
    U.S. companies have expressed--continue to--a great desire 
to invest in Colombia. Colombia is a country of 48 million 
people. It has a prominent role in the region and has ready 
access to other markets. It is really at a point where it 
should be developing in a very expansive way in terms of a 
larger global footprint.
    There are issues that have yet to be resolved. There is 
every hope that they can be resolved in short order. But it is 
under a concentrated review by the U.S. Trade Representative, 
by the Labor Department, and by the Department of Commerce. I 
have spoken with both Commerce and Labor about these issues. 
This is a serious and ongoing conversation. It will continue to 
be so because there are elements of the Colombian economy that 
continue to involve directly issues such as child labor, and I 
do not mean child labor as in cutting the lawn on the weekend, 
really the misuse of children in a labor market.
    So those are, again, longer-term shifts that have to take 
place. I think we are very positive in terms of the movement 
and hopeful that that can reach a good conclusion.
    Senator Kaine. I would encourage you in that way. I think 
this has a lot of benefit for Colombia if it is done, but I 
also think it has benefit for the OECD. An organization like 
the OECD can easily kind of be viewed as a northern hemisphere 
thing, and I think it is really important that southern 
countries around the world also find their own places in 
organizations like this. So I would encourage you in that way.
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Thank you.
    Senator Kaine. Ms. Royce, let me just put a pet issue of 
mine on the table for your new job, and that is in the area of 
education exchange. Of course, we have a crown jewel education 
system, Fulbright scholarships and other things. I so often 
worry, though, when we talk about education, we always dis 
career and technical education. And I think there is an 
excellent opportunity for exchanges in this space. If you 
qualify for a Pell Grant in this country, you can use it on a 
college campus but you cannot use it at an apprenticeship 
program or a career and technical program not on a college 
campus. If you are in the military like my son, you get a 
tuition assistance benefit. You can use it at a college campus. 
You cannot use it to take a welding certification exam if you 
are an ordnance officer. We have a presidential scholars 
program for 50 years that recognizes high school students who 
are super stars. Only recently Senator Portman and I convinced 
President Obama to start recognizing career and technical 
education super stars too. You can pretty much look across the 
spectrum of U.S. education policy, and we say college is great 
and we have kind of underestimated career and technical 
education and apprenticeships.
    There are some superb apprenticeship programs around the 
world, Switzerland, Germany. The United States has some 
wonderful examples, Newport News shipbuilding apprenticeship 
program in Virginia.
    But I would just hope as you are thinking about educational 
exchanges how to both share our best practices and learn from 
the best practices of others, that it would not just be about 
college or elementary and secondary, but we would make sure 
that we include career, technical, and apprenticeship programs 
as part of what we both want to learn about and spotlight that 
we do well.
    Ms. Royce. Thank you, Senator Kaine, for that input.
    I would also add that I would be very open to looking at 
those types of programs. And as you are very well aware, many 
programs have been conducted working back and forth with 
Congress. A couple of those include the Kennedy-Lugar program 
for high school students. Another one you probably are aware of 
is the Ben Gilman program, and under Ben Gilman it provided an 
opportunity for people that were first generation students and 
their families to go to college. It helps with financial need. 
Of course, again, that was in direct consultation with 
Congress.
    So I would just add that I think these types of ideas are 
great to think about and include. So I appreciate your input 
and would look forward to, if I am confirmed, working with you 
on this.
    Senator Kaine. That is very good. Thank you so much.
    And I have another question or two that I will just submit 
for the written record.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Ambassador Macmanus, I wanted to ask you about cocaine 
because from 2006 to 2010, according to the RAND study, there 
was a 50 percent drop-off in consumption of cocaine in the 
United States, and then it began to climb to the point where we 
have seen record supplies of cocaine over the last couple 
years, obviously, much if not most of it from Colombia. And the 
increase, of course, has led to a drop in prices and an 
increase in the rate of consumption in both the United States 
and in parts of Europe.
    The timing of that climb, of course, coincided with the 
peace deal. They stopped aerial eradication, but the other 
thing that happened is they created this sort of program where 
they were paying growers to stop growing coca but to be in a 
position to qualify for it, for those payments, the farmers had 
to be growing coca. So people started growing it so they would 
qualify for the payments when they became available.
    The point is we now have seen historic numbers of cocaine, 
and we know it is destined to come here. Already cocaine kills 
more people than heroin does among African Americans in the 
United States. So it is a burgeoning problem.
    It is my belief that, if confirmed, you will be the 
Ambassador to Colombia at a time in which cocaine is going to 
begin to compete with heroin and opiates as a headline issue in 
the United States and immediately people are going to realize 
where it is coming from and there is going to be real tension 
created as a result of it.
    Give us some ideas about how you plan to get ahead of that 
both in your interactions with the Colombian Government and the 
United States Government because I see that coming, and I see 
it potentially becoming a major irritant in the relationship 
between our countries. And, quite frankly, I could foresee 
people begin to question--not me, but others begin to question 
the wisdom of a plan that is supposed to be dealing with this, 
and yet they will be saying we are spending all this money and 
it is not working. So how do you plan to get out ahead of it 
both working with our counterparts in Colombia and, of course, 
the folks at the State Department and here in the U.S. 
Government?
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Thank you, Senator.
    I think that irritation is already there. It is beyond an 
irritation. The President in last year's declaration on a list 
of major drug producing and drug trafficking nations expressed 
a deep concern about the increase in coca cultivation and 
cocaine production in Colombia. The Colombians have felt the 
same way. Members of this committee have expressed themselves 
of this view. And the Colombian Government itself has also 
expressed the concern that they need to have on this issue.
    The most recent experience on interdiction has been a 
positive one. In 2017, 500 metric tons of cocaine hydrochloride 
were interdicted--and cocaine paste. As well, the highest 
number of hectares of coca cultivation were eradicated, most of 
that with forced eradication, some of it, a much smaller 
number, with voluntary eradication.
    The Colombian approach, which is a new strategy--and while 
it is tied to and is part of addressing cocaine that was built 
into the peace accords, both rural reform and addressing 
illicit drugs were elements of the peace accord. They place 
responsibilities well within the grasp of the Colombian 
Government to begin to address these in a coordinated way. So 
they have been using and beginning to use a whole-of-government 
approach.
    Now, the growth is due to a number of factors. You 
mentioned the payments that would be made to farmers who were 
cultivating. We saw that growth beginning earlier, in fact 
before the end of aerial spraying. Some of that we take to be 
encouragement by the FARC. Some of it was in anticipation of 
negotiation, we think, for the peace accords, and some of it 
was clearly related to the opportunity to turn in hectares of 
coca cultivation for a cash payment. All of those have a 
predictable quality to them.
    What is absolutely necessary is the commitment of the 
Colombian Government to reduce these numbers. Most recently we 
had a high-level dialogue with Colombia earlier this month, and 
the Colombians have committed themselves to an eradication 
within 5 years to a level of 50 percent current numbers. Now, 
we believe that there is both the focus, the appropriate tools, 
the professionalized military that was one of the outcomes of 
Plan Colombia that lead to the ability of Colombia to do that.
    I recognize that there is a chain of suffering that starts 
in Colombia and gets to the United States, and every country 
that is affected along the way and certainly Americans who are 
affected by the introduction of illicit narcotics in the United 
States are part of that and feel that suffering. We know we 
have a responsibility at this end, and we have spoken about it 
in terms of demand reduction. Unfortunately, demand also 
appears to be rising. Some of those indicators like the number 
of first-time users continues to push up. These are all issues 
that are going to have to be dealt with in a coordinated 
fashion at our end, and we understand what the coordination 
needs to be at that end.
    Senator Rubio. And it is impossible to talk about cocaine 
and its distribution without mentioning--let me begin by saying 
that even as some elements of the FARC may have disbanded and 
disarmed and decommissioned, the space they once occupied in 
many parts of Colombia have been taken up by cartel and/or ELN 
elements. And you are someone that is very familiar with the 
region and obviously, as a career service at the highest levels 
of the State Department, are aware of this. It is 
indisputable--right--that the distribution of cocaine is 
assisted actively by elements in the Venezuelan Government that 
participate both in its distribution and, as we have seen with 
kingpin designations and sanctions and indictments in the 
United States against some of these elements, and our own 
counterparts in Colombia point to this that the Venezuelan 
Government is supportive of the ELN, has often hosted its 
officials on that side of the territory. But without doubt, as 
you see the aerial routes that are distributing through the 
Caribbean, they almost all proceed from Venezuelan territory of 
Colombian cocaine. And therefore, as we look at the surge, it 
is fair to say that elements within the Venezuelan Government 
and/or military are active participants in the distribution of 
these cocaine routes.
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Senator, it would test credulity to 
believe that the ELN, which has traditionally operated along 
the Venezuelan border and has also acquired greater license in 
areas that had previously been controlled by the FARC, that 
that border somehow becomes an impossible barrier for them. The 
border between Colombia and Venezuela is ripe for mischief and 
for illegality. The ELN has an interest in creating 
opportunities for generating illegal funds. So I would have to 
say that only somebody who was waiting for the final analysis 
to make that conclusion would disagree with your statement. I 
do not.
    Senator Rubio. It is also fair to say that if you look at 
the challenges facing Colombia, whether it is assistance to the 
ELN, whether it is a massive migratory issue now with refugees 
fleeing Venezuela, whether it is the distribution of cocaine, 
including by elements within the Government, the nephews of the 
dictator in Venezuela--they have been convicted--Venezuela 
poses a very significant national security threat to our 
strongest ally in South America in Colombia.
    Ambassador Macmanus.. That is correct, Senator.
    The Summit of the Americas this year in April has as its 
main theme democratic governance against corruption. You put a 
colon after that and then say the problem of Venezuela. 
Clearly, Venezuela as a regional threat, as a threat to 
Colombia is the principal problem of today of right now. There 
are solutions and steps that can be taken and that we have 
called for, that the United States Government has called for 
that are simple steps of return to democracy, return to a 
respect for human rights, allow free and fair and transparent 
elections to go forward with international observers, open a 
humanitarian corridor for food and medicine. Many of the 
Venezuelans who are crossing the border are seeking medical 
attention, are seeking simple vaccinations. Children are dying, 
babies are dying as a result of that inability to secure basic 
care.
    Senator Rubio. One last question in that regard, and that 
is, as you see more and more people coming across the border--
by the way, some are citizens of both Venezuela and Colombia.
    Ambassador Macmanus.. Yes.
    Senator Rubio. But as they come across the border and more 
strain is placed upon our allies, do you anticipate at some 
point, if not already, that the United States will need to step 
up and potentially provide Colombia with assistance, along with 
the international community, to deal with the pressures being 
created by these large number of refugees flowing into Colombia 
from Venezuela?
    Ambassador Macmanus.. I do, Senator. I have had 
conversations with USAID and with other elements in the State 
Department that would be directly involved in that kind of 
assistance. I think Colombia understands deeply the depth of 
this particular problem and this crisis and are prepared to 
seek support when it is needed in order to help alleviate the 
enormous stress that it is going to place both on the 
individuals, the Venezuelans themselves who have been 
displaced, but also on the systems in Colombia that are going 
to need to be able to respond to it.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Ms. Bernstein, I wanted to ask you, I guess it is, one 
question with two parts about the Dominican Republic. One of 
the things that is concerning to us is while we are allies of 
the Dominican Republic and work with them and have strong 
cultural and economic ties, in settings like the United 
Nations, their votes are very often not aligned with our 
priorities. As an example, it is my view and I think the view 
of most of the Members of the Senate--in fact, I know it is 
because 100 Members of the Senate addressed the letter that I 
led with Senator Coons to the United Nations Secretary-General 
to express our deep concern about the unfair treatment of 
Israel at the United Nations. It is an entity and a body that 
frequently is home to anti-Israel resolutions that in many 
cases attempts to de-legitimize Israel.
    For example, in 2016 at its 71st session, the U.N. General 
Assembly adopted 18 resolutions directed at Israel, resolutions 
on which the United States voted no. The Dominican Republic 
voted for each of these 18 resolutions.
    We have also seen them at the OAS be less than cooperative 
on efforts to pressure the Venezuelan Government, in essence, 
efforts to allow the OAS to function the way it is supposed to, 
and that is to be an organization of democracies in the region 
that protect democracy and that condemn nations that are 
violating it. And obviously, one of the reasons potentially why 
this is happening is their membership in Petrocaribe, which is 
a group of countries that receive subsidized oil from Venezuela 
in exchange for Venezuelan influence in their government.
    I would just ask, do you commit to this committee that this 
is an issue that you are going to begin a dialogue with the 
highest levels of the Government of the Dominican Republic, 
both on their anti-Israel votes at the United Nations and also 
at their consistently not wanting to vote in favor of 
supporting democracy in the region? Will you commit to this 
committee that that will be among the issues that you will 
raise, if so directed by the Department of State, at the 
highest levels of the Dominican Republic Government?
    Ms. Bernstein. Yes, absolutely, Senator. I look forward to 
working with you in concert on this, if confirmed.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    Judge Prado, this has already been asked, and I just want 
to reiterate. I think that Argentina has a lot of positive 
things happening. They are a member of the Lima Group, as an 
example, a group of nations that have taken it upon themselves 
to combine and coordinate efforts to pressure Venezuela's 
dictatorship and to push forward. And I would just ask, do you 
commit to doing all you can in your role to coordinate with 
your U.S. counterparts and the other member countries and to 
continuing support of the Argentine Government's commitment to 
this process?
    Mr. Prado. Yes, Senator, I do. President Macri has been a 
longtime critique of Venezuela's Government and the treatment 
of the citizens of Venezuela by the Maduro administration. He 
took efforts to have Venezuela taken out of the MERCOSUR, which 
is a common market group of South American countries. So I 
think there are some positive moves being made by the Argentine 
Government in its criticism of how the Venezuelan 
administration is treating its citizens and the lack of 
democracy. And I intend to do all I can to support their 
efforts to remedy the situation.
    Senator Rubio. And as I have mentioned in the opening 
statement just yesterday, the Argentine judiciary referred for 
public trial former President Cristina Kirchner and other 
senior officials in connection with the cover-up of the 1994 
bombing of a Jewish community center in Buenos Aires by the 
Iranian Government. They are accused of abuse of power and 
obstruction of justice in trying to avoid holding Iran 
responsible for the terror attack which, by the way, killed 85 
people.
    And I would just ask if you could commit to the committee, 
if confirmed, that you will not only do all you can to support 
their government in the search for justice for those who died 
in that attack but also that you will support and do all you 
can on behalf of the U.S. Government to support them in any 
ongoing investigations into what I believe was the murder and 
the assassination of a prosecutor, Alberto Nisman, who was on 
to the truth when his life was taken.
    Mr. Prado. Yes, Senator. I appreciate that question and I 
will do all I can to support the Macri administration in its 
investigation of this very serious, tragic situation that has 
occurred in their country.
    Senator Rubio. And finally, Ms. Royce, Florida, my home 
State, has benefited from educational and cultural exchanges in 
numerous ways, including a large impact on our economy. There 
was an article in the ``Washington Post'' in November of last 
year that basically outlined that there has been a sharp change 
in foreign student enrollment in the U.S. with numbers 
declining in both 2016 and in 2017 of international students 
coming to the United States.
    I guess my question is, if confirmed, what ideas do you 
have about increasing participation of educational and cultural 
exchanges both here and abroad?
    Ms. Royce. Thank you, Senator, for your question.
    The information that I have received is that we have had 1 
million international visitors this past year and the year 
before. So, of course, I would like to continue that.
    I would like to also add that in that number, we even have 
14,000--you are talking about international students?
    Senator Rubio. I think it is a combination of students and 
cultural exchange.
    Ms. Royce. Okay. I am sorry. Maybe you can repeat the 
question.
    Senator Rubio. The question is what can we do to continue 
to ensure--part of what is happening is in some countries 
around the world, they now have options available that they 
could only have gotten in the United States in years past. That 
is a part of development. But there might be some other factors 
at play that might be discouraging the growth in study abroad 
in the United States and/or in participating in exchanges 
between students who are coming here, whether it is rhetoric 
and our politics or perhaps the unavailability of some of these 
programs.
    But one of the things that we notice in our work--and I 
think the ranking member would agree--is oftentimes when you 
meet with important foreign leaders, one of the things you will 
notice in their biography is that they graduated from an 
American university, and it actually has a real impact in our 
ability to engage with them because they are familiar with our 
system of government, they are familiar with the United States. 
It is a real advantage to this country.
    What ideas do you have to ensure that we continue on that 
trend as we may face new global competitors for that and/or 
perhaps options domestically that may no longer make our 
universities or our cultural exchanges as attractive as they 
may have been?
    Ms. Royce. Thank you very much for the question, Senator.
    You mentioned about the interlocutors of top world leaders, 
and I mentioned that in my opening statement, that one in three 
world leaders today are actually people that have experienced 
the United States firsthand through the international ECA 
programs that we have had.
    I would also add that we have been doing some exciting 
things by trying to promote English, and we have English 
centers around the world where we offer young people the 
opportunity to learn English and they can do that online. And 
so consequently, that also gives them an exposure.
    Another thing that is exciting about ECA right now is we 
have got some digital diplomacy initiatives. Even our Facebook 
page--we have seven different Facebook pages, and we have got 
the third largest hits on one of the Facebook pages. And we 
have got a Twitter feed. We have got digital initiatives where 
people can actually go online and have a mentor.
    I will just add one type of program. It is the Christopher 
Stevens initiative, which is actually all virtual. Excuse me. 
After our former Ambassador. And so consequently, we are 
engaging with people that normally would never have the 
opportunity to interface with an American. And so I think that 
is another example where we are able to create some hybrid 
programs to expose people to also increase our numbers.
    But what I have understood from the information I have 
received is that we have had a number of people that are still 
continuing to come to the United States from the international 
visitor program, and there is a strong economic impact. I am 
sure you know the numbers. Those students have created 450,000 
jobs here in the United States, $39 billion worth of impact 
financially.
    Again, I will continue to try to do everything I can, if 
confirmed, to try to continue to promote ways for people to be 
interested in coming to the United States, again because these 
leaders are so important.
    And also I would just add on a short-term basis, having 
these leaders here gives us an opportunity to talk about things 
that are very important, countering terrorism and managing the 
refugee crisis, for example, or even responding to disaster 
relief because these people are already here. So if that is a 
leader or an exchange student--and if it is a student, of 
course, they are getting exposed to American values. We 
mentioned human rights, democracy, rule of law. Free speech is 
another one. We are talking about countering aggressive 
regimes, getting the opportunity to be able to speak and gather 
freely, and I know, Senator, also on technology, even open and 
free data flows and cross-border communications. I think that 
is really important.
    Thank you.
    Senator Cardin. If I could ask Ms. Royce on the summer 
work-travel programs, J-1 visas. 17 Senators sent a letter to 
Secretary Tillerson last summer in regards to the importance of 
the continuation of that program. It has been under concern.
    I could just give you one example. I had talked with the 
Jewish camp organizers and the use of the J-1 visa for 
counselors at the camp for cultural opportunities for the 
campers there. It is an incredible program.
    We are concerned in this immigration debate that this 
program remain as a high priority. What is your view on this 
program?
    Ms. Royce. Thank you, Senator Cardin, for your question.
    I wanted to share with you that I am familiar with the 
letter, and I also was impressed with the fact that each of you 
that signed on really talked about the importance of the summer 
work-travel program to the local community. In addition, you 
recognized something that is very important in that letter, 
which was the fact that Americans should also have the 
opportunity to be able to go for these jobs. And in fact, it 
was recognized then that these jobs should also be promoted 
broadly to Americans. But, of course, there is always the need 
for talent in high demand season.
    One of the things about this area is that they are closely 
monitored and site visits are conducted, and they are always 
updating the regulations. And I want to let you know that I 
would continue with those practices in a transparent way and 
would want to work with you on those. And I understand the 
summer work-travel program has really strong bipartisan 
support. And obviously, just even speaking on the Hill here on 
my visits, I just know how important that is, and I would be 
interested in continuing this dialogue.
    Senator Cardin. Thank you.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Rubio. Thank you.
    All right. Well, thank you for your service, your 
willingness to serve. We look forward to the chairman moving 
this on to the confirmation vote.
    The record on this hearing is going to remain open until 
the close of business this Friday.
    And seeing no objection, the hearing is adjourned.

         [Whereupon, at 4:10 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]

                              ----------                              



              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Robin Bernstein by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

Trump Organization Conflicts
    The Trump Organization, which the President continues to own and 
benefit financially from, has a real estate venture in the Dominican 
Republic. After being dormant for many years, the Trump Organization 
appeared to revive its interest in the project last year, saying that 
the development could include many phases. Among other things, it will 
require permit approvals from the local government. According to 
reports, local government officials refer to it as ``the Trump 
project,'' and believe that a proposal to roll back environmental 
regulations for the project could ``help Trump.'' I know that you have 
stressed the importance of maintaining high ethical standards, and I 
hope you would agree with me that it is important to avoid any action 
that would create or appear to create a situation where U.S. Government 
resources are used to benefit the personal financial interests of U.S. 
Government officials, including the President.

    Question 1. If confirmed, do you commit that under your leadership, 
the U.S. Embassy will not participate in any matters related to the 
Trump Organization's interests in the Dominican Republic, including 
meeting with any members of the Trump Organization and Trump family 
members?

    Answer. As a Chief of Mission, commercial advocacy is one of the 
most important parts of the job. While remaining vigilant about 
avoiding any appearance of impropriety, it is important for embassy 
teams to engage in U.S. export promotion, assist U.S. companies in 
understanding the Dominican investment climate, and engage in economic 
and commercial diplomacy to promote fair and transparent business and 
trade policies that ensure a level playing field for U.S. businesses in 
the Dominican Republic.
    If confirmed to be Ambassador to the Dominican Republic, I will 
always act in the best interest of the United States Government and the 
American people. I will never place the interests of any individual or 
company ahead of those of the American people. I will make clear that 
this is my expectation for all Embassy staff.

    Question 2. Do you commit to refrain from weighing in with any 
Dominican Republic Government officials or any members of the private 
sector regarding any Trump Organization interests in the Dominican 
Republic?

    Answer. If confirmed as Ambassador to the Dominican Republic, I 
will engage with the Department's ethics lawyers on any matters 
relating to the Trump Organization and engagements with Trump family 
members engaged in the Organization's business activities in the 
Dominican Republic. I will always act in the best interest of the 
United States Government and the American people. I will never place 
the interests of any individual or company ahead of those of the 
American people, at the same time by law the U.S. embassy must not 
disadavantage the Trump Organization vis a vis other U.S. businesses. 
If confirmed, I will remain vigilant with regard to my ethics 
obligations and ensure that all of my actions as Ambassador are 
consistent with ethics laws. Should any questions arise, I will direct 
my staff to seek guidance from the Department's ethics officials.

    Question 3. How do you plan to avoid any meetings or discussions 
that could create the appearance of a conflict of interest, given that 
a wide range of businesses and government officials in the Dominican 
Republic could be involved with the Trump Organization's ongoing 
project?

    Answer. If confirmed, as with all meetings, I will remain vigilant 
with regard to those matters that come before me and ensure that my 
actions are consistent with ethics laws. In any matters relating to the 
Trump Organization, I will seek guidance from the Department's ethics 
officials with the goal of avoiding even the appearance of a conflict 
of interest.

    Question 4. How do you plan to ensure that Embassy staff does not 
inadvertently participate in any matters that could be perceived as 
improperly benefiting the Trump Organization or the President?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will always act in the best interest of the 
United States Government and the American people. I will never place 
the interests of any individual or company ahead of those of the 
American people. I will make clear my expectation for all Embassy staff 
to act consistent with ethics laws and to consult directly with the 
Department's ethics lawyers should they have any questions or concerns.
Tax Audit
    I understand your tax history indicates that there may be some 
confusion about what resources can be allocated for business use, as 
opposed to personal use.

    Question 5. Why were your tax returns the subject of an audit by 
the IRS?

    Answer. The personal taxes paid were the determination by the IRS 
that a portion of our disallowed client related business expenses 
became personal expenses and as such were subject to personal tax as 
opposed to business tax consistent with IRS regulations. We amended our 
tax filings with the IRS and paid the additional tax.

    Question 6 What was the nature of the issues that the IRS raised?

    Answer. The issue raised by the IRS was the disallowance of 
business expense deductions.

    Question 7. Do you believe that the IRS's decision that over 
$222,000 in back taxes was owed was correct? Why or why not?

    Answer. The payment to the IRS was the result of a compromise 
recommended by our CPAs and tax lawyer after consultation. We decided 
resolve the matter as it amounted to 2.7 percent of our sales over this 
three year period as opposed to a costly litigation process with an 
uncertain outcome.
    Our company and its financial representatives insisted that due to 
the nature of our business of representing high net worth clients, 
entertainment such as dinners and professional sporting events were 
valid business expenses. This allowed our company to form, strengthen 
and gain the trust of our prospects and existing clients. We submitted 
a list of business professionals who were our guests at the events over 
the 3 years of the audit and the income from these clients far exceeded 
the expenses incurred that ultimately became disallowed by the IRS. The 
agent summarily dismissed this information and insisted the attendance 
at these events was personal. In fact, one response was ``if your 
product was good enough, then the sales would occur without the 
personal relationships.''
Hillary Clinton ``Treasonous'' Comment
    I have said before in nomination hearings that in our public 
discourse, words matter. And they matter, in particular, for diplomats. 
On October 26, 2016, you stated, ``This corruption that Hillary Clinton 
has committed, I think it's treasonous.''

    Question 8. What precisely was your comment about treasonous 
corruption referring to?

    Answer. I had first thought the comment was made during a 
discussion of the use of an unsecured server for emails. Since then, I 
realized the comment was made during a discussion of hacked emails and 
contributions to the Clintons' charitable foundation.

    Question 9. Do you stand by that statement?

    Answer. The comment was made during the passion of the last weeks 
of a very intense campaign. If confirmed, I understand and acknowledge 
that as a representative of the United States that my comments must be 
guarded and non-political.

    Question 10. What is your definition of treason?

    Answer. My view is that treason includes the furnishing of our 
enemies with classified information as well as any act that weakens the 
power of our country to resist its enemies.

    Question 11. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. Since 1975, I have regularly participated actively in free 
and democratic bipartisan election campaigns to help promote and elect 
candidates who believe in democracy, human rights and American 
prosperity. I believe the impact of my actions has served to help elect 
candidates who believe and actively support these ideals.
    Additionally, I have routinely engaged in civic and community 
organizations in an effort to make a difference in my community, 
including serving on boards and task forces,fundraising, and leading 
efforts to assist underserved communities, support equal rights, 
business and mentoring opportunities for women, prevent human human 
trafficking, and assist those who have been adversely impacted by 
natural disasters in our region.

    Question 12. What are the most pressing human rights issues in the 
Dominican Republic? What are the most important steps you expect to 
take--if confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in the 
Dominican Republic? What do you hope to accomplish through these 
actions?

    Answer. U.S. human rights promotion in the Dominican Republic over 
the last several decades has been instrumental in improving the 
country's human rights record and bolstering the stability of its 
democratic institutions. Forty years ago, the Dominican Republic was 
just emerging from a tumultuous period of instability and authoritarian 
rule that followed the 1961 assassination of Dictator Rafael Leonidas 
Trujillo, whose 30-year rule was marked by mass killings and 
persecution. Since the late 1970s, however, U.S. assistance has helped 
the Dominican Republic restore democratic rule--including the peaceful 
transition of power between parties--and dramatically improve 
government authorities' respect for human rights. While we still have 
ongoing concerns such as discrimination, gender-based violence and 
human trafficking for example, these advances demonstrate that U.S. 
engagement on human rights yields significant benefits over the long 
term.
    If confirmed, I will continue the U.S. Government's longstanding 
efforts to strengthen protections for human rights as well as 
mechanisms to hold government officials accountable for human rights 
violations and acts of official corruption. I will also use my platform 
as Ambassador to work with the Dominican people and the country's 
leadership to foster greater protections for human rights.

    Question 13. 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 Dominican 
Republic in advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in 
general?

    Answer. The U.S. Government has long invested in strengthening 
Dominican institutions. That work continues, but institutional capacity 
remains a persistent challenge. If confirmed, I commit to ensuring U.S. 
taxpayer resources devoted to assistance programs--through our efforts 
under the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative, development projects 
funded by USAID, and other initiatives--continue to strengthen 
democratic institutions and provide training to Dominican authorities 
to address the concerns I have highlighted.

    Question 14. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in the Dominican Republic? If confirmed, what 
steps will you take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar 
efforts, and ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and 
security cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, the promotion of human rights will be 
one of my top priorities as Ambassador. Meeting with civil society 
groups is an essential part of that engagement, and I intend to meet 
regularly with groups in the Dominican Republic that work on the human 
rights issues I have outlined. If confirmed, I plan to meet with U.S. 
human rights groups before I depart for Santo Domingo and to maintain 
an ongoing dialogue with them.
    If confirmed, the professional law enforcement, military, and 
diplomatic staff at the Embassy and I will deliver messaging to the 
Dominican Government to make clear our expectations regarding respect 
for human rights by security forces. We will urge that Dominican 
authorities respect human rights principles in their conduct of 
security operations and adherence to the Leahy standards.

    Question 15. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with 
the Dominican Republic to address cases of key political prisoners or 
persons otherwise unjustly targeted by the Dominican Republic?

    Answer. Yes. Presently, the United States does not recognize any 
cases of individuals detained for purely political purposes in the 
Dominican Republic. Should I become aware of a case of politically-
motivated arrest or imprisonment, if confirmed, my Embassy staff and I 
will engage vigorously with the Government to see that such detainees 
are released without delay.

    Question 16. Will you engage with the Dominican Republic on matters 
of human rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral 
mission?

    Answer. Yes. As I have outlined, if confirmed, promoting human 
rights , civil rights and democratic governance will be among my top 
priorities as Ambassador to the Dominican Republic. While the Dominican 
Republic has made noteworthy advances with regard to human rights in 
recent years, there is work still to do. If confirmed, I will make use 
of every tool available to champion the cause of human rights. I 
believe that by standing by our principles we demonstrate credibility 
and earn the respect of the Dominican Government and people, even when 
the messages we deliver are not easy. In doing so, we will build on our 
already-positive reputation in the Dominican Republic, where we enjoy 
high favorability ratings in public opinion polling.

    Question 17. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 18. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 19. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in the Dominican Republic?

    Answer. No.
Diversity
    Research from private industry demonstrates that, when managed 
well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of creativity 
and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote, mentor and 
support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and 
underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?
    Question 20. What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse 
and inclusive?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will immediately let it be known that 
diversity and inclusion practices will be one of my priorities in the 
embassy. First and foremost, I will lead by example by treating staff 
and requiring staff to treat everyone with respect. Additionally, I 
would be interested in reviewing the existing embassy hiring practices 
and hiring strategies to ensure they resemble the environment we 
operate in.
    Additionally, for positions in which I am able to have a hand in 
hiring, I would seek to make progress in areas where there are gaps to 
achieve diversity by asking employees for their input and referrals and 
reaching out to community organizations to find qualified candidates to 
fill the gaps.
    Finally, if confirmed, I will work to ensure that mentoring and 
training programs for staff are top of mind at all working levels of 
the Mission. I would also strive to ensure that all supervisors both 
have the tools they need to promote diversity, mentoring and inclusion 
and pledge that it is something that will remain extremely important to 
me throughout my tenure.

                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                 Robin Bernmstein by Senator Tim Kaine

    Question 1. The Medina Government has hosted preliminary talks 
between Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and the Venezuelan 
opposition. Although the opposition has recently announced that it will 
not participate in talks at this time, do you see any circumstances 
under which the Dominican Republic could help broker an agreement 
between the two sides? To what extent, if at all, should the U.S. 
Government encourage such a dialogue?

    Answer. The United States has rightly applauded President Medina 
and his government for their leadership in hosting negotiations between 
the Venezuelan Government and opposition. Unfortunately, over the 
course of the last several months, the Maduro regime did not take the 
opportunity to negotiate in good faith. I believe we should continue to 
encourage meaningful dialogue provided it leads to an outcome that 
guarantees free and fair elections in Venezuela.
    If confirmed, I will place a high priority on engaging the 
Dominican Government to take steps to help bring the Venezuelan crisis 
closer to a peaceful resolution. Right now, the Maduro regime does not 
appear willing to engage in meaningful negotiations, so channels like 
the Organization of American States may well be the best avenues 
through which the Dominican Republic can help bring about the free and 
fair election process the Venezuelan people deserve.

                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                   Marie Royce by Senator Bob Corker

J-1 Cultural Exchange Visa Programs
    If confirmed, you will lead the bureau responsible for 
administering the J-1 Cultural Exchange Visa Programs, including the 
Summer Work Travel Program. It has been reported that the 
administration is planning to make changes to these programs, and I 
want to make sure that any changes do not have unintended consequences 
that undermine their success in the future. I am also concerned that 
these programs are not fully understood by other stakeholders within 
the Executive Branch.

    Question 1. Will you commit that you and your staff will advocate 
for these exchange programs within the State Department and in the 
interagency?

    Answer. If confirmed, I intend to review any suggested changes to 
J-Visa or Private Sector Exchange Visitor programs regulations and 
policy guidance. As you know, the J-Visa program is an educational and 
cultural exchange, not a work program. It is funded primarily by fees 
paid by participants. The J-Visa provides public diplomacy engagement 
with more than 300,000 participants from 200 countries and territories 
annually. The program is implemented by the private sector at virtually 
no charge to the Department. I understand that participants in J-Visa 
programs with a work component are already not permitted under current 
regulation to displace American workers. I would welcome meaningful 
input from the stakeholder community on what works and what could be 
improved in the Private Sector Exchange Visitor programs and will make 
any decisions on the changes in those programs in a fully transparent 
way.

    Question 2. Will you work with me and my staff to ensure that any 
changes to the Summer Work Travel program or other exchanges have the 
effect of strengthening, rather than limiting, the programs and 
enhancing their future returns for our country?

    Answer. The Educational and Cultural Affairs Bureau's Office of 
Private Sector Exchange (ECA/EC) oversees the J Visa Exchange Visitor 
Program (EVP), which enables more than 1,500 U.S. sponsors to bring 
more than 308,000 privately funded international exchange visitors to 
the United States each year for educational and cultural exchange 
experiences in 13 different program categories, including Summer Work 
Travel (SWT).
    When international young people participate in SWT jobs, they get 
first-hand experience with American society and culture. SWT student 
participants are engaged primarily by small and family-operated U.S. 
businesses in tourist destinations to meet short-term, high-volume 
worker needs during peak tourist seasons. SWT students supplement and 
sustain the existing U.S. workforce in these seasonal endeavors and 
serve as cultural ambassadors from their home countries to American 
communities.
    Private Sector Exchange programs come at virtually no cost to U.S. 
taxpayers, funded as they are through fees paid by the sponsors and 
participants, but they have many public diplomacy benefits that serve 
foreign policy goals, advance national security, bolster U.S. 
leadership and influence in the world, and promote mutual understanding 
between Americans and the people of other countries. If confirmed, I 
welcome the opportunity to hear from all of the stakeholders in these 
programs on their effectiveness and value for our country.

                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                 Marie Royce by Senator Robert Menendez

Exchanges Budget
    International exchange programs are often considered one of the 
most effective U.S. public diplomacy efforts, building long-term 
relationships and mutual understanding between U.S. and foreign 
participants. Funding for State Department educational and cultural 
exchanges has mostly remained level or increased slightly in recent 
years. In the President's FY 2018 budget for State Department programs, 
however, exchanges funding received a proposed cut of over 50 percent 
from FY 2017 levels, based on the argument that such funding is no 
longer necessary given the expansion of non-U.S. Government funded 
exchange opportunities in the United States and globally over the last 
five decades.

    Question 1. Do you agree that exchanges funding should be cut?

    Answer. Exchanges are a valued aspect of America's international 
leadership. At any level of resources, if confirmed, I would be 
committed to ensuring that ECA assets are marshaled to support the 
administration's highest foreign policy priorities.

    Question 2. What is the importance of State Department funding for 
international exchanges?

    Answer. My understanding is that State Department exchanges are 
designed to respond to the foreign policy challenges faced by our 
country--that they are created and conducted in consultation with 
colleagues throughout the Department, with Missions around the world, 
and with Congress.
    Exchanges move people in order to move values, policies and ideas. 
They create networks of men and women around the globe who have shared 
interests and who are prepared to make common cause with us.
    I see exchanges as American values in action and I know from my own 
experience that the relationships that grow out of this engagement 
endure through elections, crises and regime changes.
    I understand that one in three world leaders today is an alumnus or 
alumna of ECA exchanges. I see this as a remarkable fact and one that 
provides our President and Secretary with interlocutors who have 
firsthand experience of the United States.

    Question 3. What effect do you think a significant cut to exchanges 
funding would have on U.S. and foreign participation in international 
exchanges and the promotion of U.S. foreign policy through such 
exchanges?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would be committed to focusing the Bureau's 
programs on our nation's highest strategic priorities. Significant 
reductions in programs and personnel would, of course, reduce the 
number and variety of exchanges the Department would have available to 
implement.
    American missions around the world rely heavily on exchanges to 
reach key audiences and advance policies. If confirmed I would consult 
closely throughout the Department to ensure ECA programs were targeted 
on the most important objectives.

    Question 4. Can ECA rely on private sector organizations and 
individual institutions of higher learning to maintain, expand, and 
effectively administer international exchange programs that ECA would 
no longer be able to support? Is increasing ECA's exchange partnerships 
with private corporations an option in filling the funding gap for 
exchanges? Why or why not?

    Answer. As I have come to understand, cooperation and partnership 
with the private sector are the way ECA does business. All ECA grants 
go to American organizations and more than 90 percent of its budget is 
spent in America and directly invested in the skills and abilities of 
American citizens.
    Increasing such partnerships would be a priority of mine and, if 
confirmed, I believe that my experience as a businesswoman has given me 
the background and insights necessary to forge such partnerships.
    The American private sector is one of our Nation's crown jewels--a 
tremendous repository of knowledge and talent as well as a constant 
source of innovation--but it does not exist to serve the daily demands 
of foreign policy and there will always be a need for government 
exchanges that America's leadership can call upon and direct when and 
where needed.

    Question 5. ECA has proposed reducing or terminating funding for a 
number of exchange programs in recent years, but Congress has 
maintained ongoing funding for these programs in many cases. What 
programs should receive priority funding, and which might be curtailed 
or ended, in your opinion? Can programs be combined or otherwise 
streamlined to increase budget efficiencies? How will continuing 
certain programs slated by ECA for cuts or termination affect your 
strategic planning, if at all?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will be reviewing all ECA programs, 
considering those that have global reach versus programs that are 
regional or just for one country, looking at the programs that have the 
strongest support from our Missions around the world, and keeping in 
mind as well the programs that engage American citizens and provide 
them with the skills needed for our national security and economic 
prosperity.
    The recent release of the Department of State-USAID Joint Strategic 
Plan and pending Functional Bureau Strategy exercise will give me and 
the Bureau an opportunity to strategize our priorities for exchange 
programs going forward.
    If confirmed, I will look at any and all efficiencies possible for 
ECA operations and activities.
    I understand that ECA programs were developed in response to 
requests from the Department's regional bureaus, from American 
embassies, from the White House and Congress and I will want to hear 
the input and views of all key stakeholders.
    If confirmed, I would want to quickly consult with Department 
leadership to ensure that any changes in exchanges--whether increases 
or reductions--were consistent with administration foreign policy 
goals. And I would want to review their history of funding and their 
priority for key stakeholders.

    Question 6. Proponents of continued and/or increased funding for 
ECA-sponsored international exchanges often assert that such exchanges 
provide substantial economic benefits to the United States. The U.S. 
Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy reported that in FY 2017 
foreign students contributed $35.8 billion to the U.S. economy, support 
over 400,000 U.S. jobs, and that 97 percent of ECE funding goes to U.S. 
organizations, businesses, and individuals. In your estimation, will a 
significant reduction in ECE funding have any negative effect on any 
overall economic benefit that many ECA-administered exchange programs 
provide?

    Answer. If confirmed, assessing the benefits of ECA programs for 
the United States and for American citizens would be a priority. I have 
seen the same statistics that you have cited and I would want to be 
sure that I understood the full range of consequences of any changes in 
ECA programs.

    Question 7. In the past, a number of problems have been cited with 
EVP private-sector sponsor organizations placing participants in 
unsatisfactory conditions, including youth participants. Changes to 
federal regulations tightening sponsor requirements and oversight have 
resulted in better results for participants, but abuses still occur at 
times.[1] What additional steps, if any, are needed?

    Answer. I know that the Department takes seriously any allegations 
of abuse. Our first and foremost priority is to ensure each exchange 
visitor participates in a successful program. A large part of defining 
a successful program is minimizing risks to the health, safety, and 
welfare of all of our exchange visitors.
    CA has developed regulatory guidelines for its private sector 
sponsor organizations to ensure the health, safety, and welfare of 
participants. It regularly conducts monitoring and evaluation of their 
compliance with these regulations. In addition, Bureau analysts work to 
provide assistance to any private-sector sponsored exchange visitors 
who contact the Department seeking help through a hotline.
    If confirmed, I am committed to ensuring that safety is the number 
one priority.

    Question 8. In general, what changes would you recommend to improve 
the system of private partner administration of exchanges? What 
additional resources does ECA need to increase its monitoring 
capabilities or to create a more hands-on role in administering 
exchanges?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would be committed to ensuring that private 
sector programs are educational and cultural exchange programs that 
benefit American foreign policy. I am committed to ensuring they 
continue to serve as useful catalysts for positive change, creating 
generations of leaders who understand the significance of widespread 
global engagement and mutual understanding.

    Question 9. The U.S. Advisory Commission on Public Diplomacy 
recently released in FY 2017 a comprehensive review of public diplomacy 
programs including the work of ECA. In its recommendations, the 
Commission found that there are ``over 75 active ECA programs'' with 
widely varied budgets, participant numbers, scope, and purposes, 
administered under disparate ``knowledge management systems'' by ECA 
offices and public diplomacy officers in U.S. embassies abroad. In your 
opinion, does ECA need to reform its administrative structure and 
knowledge management? Will possibly reduced budgets in the future 
demand such reform?

    Answer. I too read this report and have found it to be enormously 
useful as I have prepared. If confirmed, I will be reviewing all ECA 
programs, understanding that their flexibility and diversity is one of 
their strengths in serving U.S. foreign policy goals. I would bring to 
this important effort the knowledge and abilities I have gained in the 
private sector and my commitment to rigorous evaluation to ensure 
maximum benefit for our country of every dollar.
Exchanges Broadly
    International exchange programs are often considered one of the 
most effective U.S. public diplomacy efforts, building long-term 
relationships and mutual understanding between U.S. and foreign 
participants.

    Question 10. What do you believe are the benefits that exchange 
programs provide to the United States? What role do exchanges play in 
advancing U.S. foreign policy and meeting the objectives of that 
policy?

    Answer. Exchanges create networks of men and women around the globe 
who have shared interests and who are prepared to make common cause 
with us.
    I see exchanges as American values in action and I know from my own 
experience, that the relationships that grow out of this engagement 
endure through elections and crises and regime changes.
    I understand that one in three world leaders today are alumni of 
ECA exchanges. I see this as a remarkable fact and one that provides 
our President and Secretary with interlocutors that have firsthand 
experience of the United States.

    Question 11. Many current calls for improving U.S. public diplomacy 
and international broadcasting advocate pushing a sharper promotion of 
U.S. interests, stronger persuasive tactics, countering of harmful 
propaganda, and increasing social media, broadcasting, and other 
information dissemination technologies and programs. Exchanges do not 
usually promote a pointed, controlled policy message, but instead allow 
for participant voices and experiences to be shared in an organic 
fashion. What is the importance of exchanges in this seemingly more 
fraught and urgent persuasive messaging environment?

    Answer. It is my experience from the private sector that exchanges 
can and do serve multiple objectives and help us reach a variety of 
foreign policy goals. I am not sure that there needs to be a dichotomy 
between tightly-focused foreign policy goals on the one hand and 
programs that define the field of engagement on the other. In these 
complicated and dangerous times, Department programs need to do both.
    I have reviewed the new National Security Strategy of the United 
States and was impressed with its focus on the power of values, on the 
importance of networks and alliances, and on not ceding the public 
engagement space to our competitors in the world.

    Question 12. Do exchanges need to become more disciplined in the 
way participants experience their exchanges, to ensure U.S. foreign 
policy interests are at the forefront?

    Answer. I believe that exchanges should always serve foreign policy 
and strengthen America's international leadership. ECA exchanges are 
part of the Department of State and are funded by the American taxpayer 
and, if confirmed, I would consider myself accountable to the American 
public to demonstrate their benefits.

    Question 13. What new vehicles for U.S. international exchange 
programs are being implemented or are on the horizon, and what, in your 
view, are the most important innovations that need to be made to 
improve exchange program effectiveness?

    Answer. In preparing for this hearing, I have been impressed to see 
the strides that ECA has made in pioneering virtual exchanges in a wide 
variety of ways. They are using the latest technology to connect high 
school classrooms, to professionalize the teaching of English, and to 
engage audiences that are difficult to reach through traditional means.
    f confirmed, I would be excited to explore the possibilities of 
technology and to increasing the virtual components of ECA's in-person 
exchanges.

    Question 14. How do you plan to improve ECA's leveraging of online 
tools and fora to expand exchanges and enhance their effectiveness?

    Answer. If confirmed, to give just one example, I would make it a 
priority to review the various ways in which ECA engages alumni around 
the world. There are hundreds of thousands of ECA alumni all across the 
planet--including those of the American Council of Young Political 
Leaders--who are leaders in their own professions and communities. 
Close and fruitful cooperation with this distinguished and far-flung 
network of men and women demands innovative use of online tools.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Marie Royce by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. Over the course of my career, I have had a number of 
opportunities to engage in work that promotes human rights and 
democracy. Three specific examples include work related to Afghanistan, 
Russia, and as a Board Director for the American Council of Young 
Political Leaders.
    I have had the good fortune to be engaged with Afghanistan 
professionally and personally for several years. I was recognized by 
the Nooristan Foundation with the Afghan Women ``Commitment'' award for 
my ongoing support. I championed programs which promoted human rights 
and democracy. As one example, Afghan women were given advice outlining 
their legal rights. And given support for executing those rights.
    Additionally, while serving as a Professor, at California State 
Polytechnic University, Pomona, in 2003, I was invited to teach at 
Petrozavodsk University, Russia. While the curriculum dealt largely 
with international business, I was able to address issues of human 
rights and democracy with the Russian faculty and students. I 
interviewed six Professors in Russia, and we subsequently mentored them 
at Cal Poly University. We in the Faculty helped them create several 
courses. During their stay they were exposed to several examples of 
transparency, free speech, rule of law, democratic governance and human 
rights. I arranged for them to cast their vote in their President 
election, at the Russian Consulate in Los Angeles.
    Finally, as a former delegate to Hungary & Poland, I served as a 
Board Director for the American Council of Young Political Leaders 
(ACYPL). We focused on sending delegations into emerging democracies in 
Africa, South Asia, Eastern Europe, and South America. I personally 
focused on increasing the number of women and minority delegates. One 
of my nominees helped the country of Nepal create its first 
Constitution. Our delegations promoted democratic governance, conflict 
resolution and human rights. I was able to support an in-bound 
delegation of young leaders from India and Pakistan, and hosted 
meetings for mutual understanding.

    Question 2. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in 
the Foreign Service?

    Answer. If I am confirmed, I will promote the State Department's 
formal mentoring program for members of the Foreign Service. I will 
ensure that ECA staff is aware of this opportunity, and how to 
participate. I will encourage the staff to be active participants in 
this important program. I will also invest in diversity based 
mentorship initiatives.

    Question 3. What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors in the Bureau of Education and Cultural Affairs are 
fostering an environment that is diverse and inclusive?

    Answer. Throughout my career, I have come to believe that people 
support what they create. As a result, if confirmed, I would strive to 
promote a workplace culture that is diverse and inclusive through 
enlisting the support and input from each of ECA's supervisors, 
creating a joint plan around this goal, and working together to track 
our progress.
    I believe that successful engagement and retention of diverse 
talent includes things like orientation, employee engagement and 
retention, performance management, flexible work arrangements, 
interpersonal communication, learning and development, as well as 
mentoring and diversity training to support these efforts. If 
confirmed, I hope to work tirelessly with the talented team in ECA to 
further these efforts.

    Question 4. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 5. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.Q02
    Question 6. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in any country abroad?

    Answer. No, my immediately family and I do not have any financial 
interests in any country abroad.

    Question 7. What are the most pressing human rights concerns in the 
field of Educational and Cultural Affairs today? What are the most 
important steps you expect to take--if confirmed--to advance human 
rights and democracy? What do you hope to accomplish through these 
actions?

    Answer. The Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs promotes 
mutual understanding through the work that ECA does in communities 
around the globe and in all 50 states to introduce American values to 
opinion-makers, professionals, current and future leaders, and youth. 
These global networks of men and women are often willing to make common 
cause with the United States. If confirmed, I would use these networks 
to advance longstanding U.S. values on issues of mutual concern, such 
as human rights, rule of law, civil society, and democracy.

    Question 8. 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 field of 
Educational and Cultural Affairs in advancing human rights, civil 
society and democracy in general?

    Answer. Authoritarian, non-democratic regimes that seek to keep 
their citizens from enjoying universal rights and freedoms and prevent 
their citizens from engaging with their American counterparts through 
ECA programs are some of the main obstacles to ECA programming. These 
regimes take measures to prevent their citizens from engaging with 
their American counterparts through exchange programs, travel, and 
English-language study. If confirmed, I would closely examine how ECA's 
programs, resources, and networks might best continue to address human 
rights concerns in light of U.S. policy priorities.

    Question 9. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in the field of Educational and Cultural 
Affairs?

    Answer. Yes. My background in women's leadership and outreach to 
disadvantaged communities, as well as my experience with the range of 
civil society groups and NGOs that advocate for human rights, has 
impressed upon me the importance of such connections. If confirmed, I 
will use my experience in conjunction with ECA's own extensive civil-
society networks and public-private partnerships to further deepen our 
cooperation with this sector.
Proposed State Department Budget
    For FY 2019, the White House proposed a draconian 75 percent cut to 
the budget for the State Department's Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs. Last year, there was talk that the administration 
would eliminate the budget entirely. As you know, ECA's work has 
historically received strong bipartisan support given that its programs 
are a strategic, long-term investment in promoting democratic values 
and strengthening U.S. standing in the world.

    Question 10. If confirmed, how will you make the case to Secretary 
Tillerson and the White House about the need for robust ECA funding and 
the strategic nature of ECA programs?

    Answer. My understanding is that ECA continuously aligns its 
programs with State Department policy goals and ensures that its 
academic, professional, cultural, and sports exchanges are clearly 
linked to those goals as a part of broader U.S. public diplomacy 
initiatives. If confirmed, I would prioritize maintaining the relevance 
and effectiveness of ECA's initiatives in all aspects of U.S. 
diplomacy, and will not be afraid to advocate for ECA's programming 
with State Department leadership.

    Question 11. If confirmed, will you commit to being a forceful 
advocate for robust funding for Colombia?

    Answer. I am pleased to note that the ECA Principal Deputy 
Assistant Secretary, Ambassador Jennifer Zimdahl Galt, was just in 
Bogota to participate in the U.S.-Colombia High-Level Dialogue. She 
chaired the Education, Sports, and Culture Working Group and was joined 
by colleagues who engaged on topics ranging from joint efforts to 
counter illegal narcotics trafficking to advancing regional security to 
expanding our economic partnership. If confirmed, I will continue ECA's 
efforts on behalf of the strong bilateral relationship between the 
United States and Colombia and in support of U.S. foreign policy goals 
in this key region.
Global Public Opinion of the United States
    In the past 18 months, global public opinion of the U.S. has 
plummeted dramatically. This not only has implications for our foreign 
policy, but for institutions in our country. Media reports have shown 
that many U.S. universities are having trouble recruiting foreign 
students, which has financial implications for the schools.

    Question 12. How can we be effective in the pursuit of our foreign 
policy interests and values--how you can be effective at ECA--given 
President Trump's race to the bottom on ethics, values and morality?

    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to promoting the U.S. higher 
education system, which is one of our nation's greatest assets and 
essential to our national security and economic interests at home and 
abroad. ECA promotes U.S. higher education, in conjunction with our 
missions overseas, through its network of more than 400 EducationUSA 
advising centers worldwide, which act as the official source on U.S. 
higher education abroad and counter-balance messages from competitor 
nations, such as China and Russia, looking to attract international 
students to their own shores. Due in part to the work of EducationUSA, 
and the relationships fostered through ECA exchanges, more than one 
million international students now come to the United States to study 
at over 4,000 U.S. colleges and universities every year. In 2016-17, 
they contributed over $39 billion to the U.S. economy, up from $22.7 
billion only five years ago, making international education the 
nation's seventh-largest service sector export and supporting more than 
450,000 domestic American jobs in communities across the country. 
International students are attracted to the United States by the 
excellence, dynamism and diversity of U.S. higher education 
institutions. These students enrich their understanding of U.S. society 
and develop lasting ties in fields that benefit the United States and 
its interests in the world long after they return home.
J-1 Visas
    In August of last year, a bi-partisan group of 17 senators sent 
Secretary Tillerson a letter in support on the J-1 Visa Summer Work 
Travel Program. Participants in the program have the opportunity to 
work and learn from their experience in the U.S. Additionally, many 
small businesses across the United States are dependent on participants 
in the J-1 visa program to meet their seasonal labor needs. Ending or 
reducing this program would have a real impact on communities around 
the country.
    Question 13. What is your assessment of the J-1 visa program?

    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to facilitating the J Visa 
Exchange Visitor Program (EVP), which enables more than 1,500 U.S. 
sponsors to bring more than 308,000 privately funded international 
exchange visitors to the United States each year for educational and 
cultural exchange experiences in 13 different program categories. 
Private Sector Exchange programs come at virtually no cost to U.S. 
taxpayers, funded as they are through fees paid by the sponsors and 
participants, but they have many public diplomacy benefits that serve 
foreign policy goals, advance national security, bolster U.S. 
leadership and influence in the world, and promote mutual understanding 
between Americans and the people of other countries.

    Question 14. If confirmed, do you commit to working with members of 
the Senate to ensure that the U.S. Government remains committed to the 
J-1 visa program?

    Answer. Yes. As you know, private sector exchange programs are 
educational and cultural exchange programs, not work programs. They are 
funded primarily by fees paid by participants. These programs provide 
public diplomacy engagement with more than 308,000 participants from 
200 countries and territories annually, many of whom would never 
otherwise experience American values firsthand. These programs are 
implemented by the private sector at virtually no cost to the 
Department. I understand that in some categories of exchange, employers 
are required to pay participants a salary commensurate with the salary 
they would pay U.S. workers, so employers cannot use the program to 
obtain low cost labor. I would welcome meaningful input from the 
stakeholder community on what works and what could be improved in 
private sector exchange visitor programs, and I will make any decisions 
on the changes in those programs in a fully transparent way.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
              Marie Royce by Senator Christopher A. Coons

    Question 1. Recently, the administration proposed a regulatory 
agenda that identifies all five J-1 visa Exchange Visitor programs with 
a work component for future regulations (summer work travel, au pair, 
camp counselor, intern, and trainee). What role will you play in 
reviewing draft regulations or policy guidance that could alter J-1 
programs? Will you commit to undertaking any regulatory review of these 
programs in a fully transparent way and in a manner that continues 
their significant public diplomacy benefits?

    Answer. I intend to review any suggested changes to J-Visa or 
Private Sector Exchange Visitor programs regulations and policy 
guidance. As you know, the J-Visa program is an educational and 
cultural exchange, not a work program. It is funded primarily by fees 
paid by participants. The J-Visa provides public diplomacy engagement 
with more than 300,000 participants from 200 countries and territories 
annually. The program is implemented by the private sector at virtually 
no charge to the Department. I understand that participants in J-Visa 
programs with a work component are already not permitted under current 
regulation to displace American workers. I would welcome meaningful 
input from the stakeholder community on what works and what could be 
improved in the Private Sector Exchange Visitor programs and will make 
any decisions on the changes in those programs in a fully transparent 
way.

    Question 2. The Summer Work Travel program alone contributed more 
than $500 million to the U.S. economy in 2016. Can you comment on the 
value of these programs to both the exchange participants and the U.S. 
economy?

    Answer. The Educational and Cultural Affairs Bureau's Office of 
Private Sector Exchange (ECA/EC) oversees the J Visa Exchange Visitor 
Program (EVP), which enables more than 1,500 U.S. sponsors to bring 
more than 308,000 privately funded international exchange visitors to 
the United States each year for educational and cultural exchange 
experiences in 13 different program categories, including Summer Work 
Travel (SWT).
    When international young people participate in SWT jobs, they get 
first-hand experience with American society and culture. SWT student 
participants are engaged primarily by small and family-operated U.S. 
businesses in tourist destinations to meet short-term, high-volume 
worker needs during peak tourist seasons. SWT students supplement and 
sustain the existing U.S. workforce in these seasonal endeavors and 
serve as cultural ambassadors from their home countries to American 
communities.
    Private Sector Exchange programs come at virtually no cost to U.S. 
taxpayers, funded as they are through fees paid by the sponsors and 
participants, but they have many public diplomacy benefits that serve 
foreign policy goals, advance national security, bolster U.S. 
leadership and influence in the world, and promote mutual understanding 
between Americans and the people of other countries.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Joseph E. Macmanus by Senator Marco Rubio

    Question 1. I would like to clarify the timeline. When, to the best 
of your recollection, did you first learn of an attack on the 
diplomatic compound in Benghazi on September 11, 2012?

    Answer. According to many published accounts, the attack began at 
approximately 3:42 p.m. Eastern Time in Washington on September 11, 
2012. The State Department Operations Center official Log Book notes 
that initial contact with the office of the Secretary and other senior 
officials occurred at 4:06 p.m. in the form of a written alert. I would 
have learned of the attack when this written alert was circulated.

    Question 2. Did other senior officials initially believe (as you 
did) that the attack was a terrorist act?

    Answer. My first impression was not a belief but an instinctive 
reaction. Others may have shared a similar reaction. I cannot speak for 
them or from any particular knowledge about their views.
    In our profession, in the aftermath of events like this, we advise 
restraint when one is tempted to draw uninformed conclusions, 
respectfulness of the obvious emotions, and care in separating opinions 
from facts. The difficult work is to use hard information and analysis 
to build an understanding of what took place takes time. We caution 
officers to ``stay in their lane,'' knowing that limited access to 
intelligence and other compartmented information results in certain 
officials gaining a more structured and informed analysis than others. 
Forming a three-dimensional picture of what took place takes time.

    Question 3. Did senior officials in the State Department believe by 
September 16, 2012, that the attack was likely terrorism, rather than 
being related to anti-American protests?

    Answer. My own view had not altered appreciably from September 11 
to September 16, 2012. The views of others were not obvious, but as I 
said, professional discipline would guide officers to keep their 
personal views largely personal since, at that point, it was early to 
draw final conclusions. I have never researched the record on this 
question and cannot speak for other senior officials.

    Question 4. Did you or other senior State Department officials have 
any input into National Security Advisor Susan Rice's talking points in 
public remarks she made on Sunday, September 16, 2012?

    Answer. I did not have input or contribute to talking points as you 
describe. As to others, I have no specific knowledge as to other senior 
officers' input into the preparation of these points or remarks. I have 
seen references to these talking points in public reports and the press 
and was generally aware of them but not involved in any input.

    Question 5. Do you believe that any senior administration officials 
misled the public on the nature of the attack in the two weeks that 
followed the attack?

    Answer. I would answer this from the perspective of a professional 
diplomat who has led crisis communications activities my entire career.
    In crises, no matter how much you get right, you get a lot wrong. 
The law of inverse proportion of speed and accuracy immediately 
overwhelms you. The comments made in the opening moments rarely prove 
accurate in the end. The spokesperson slips up, and the misimpression 
sinks in. Analysis is lacking that might help bring clarity and 
answers, and complex environments always need careful after-action 
review to produce reliable conclusions. In addition, even after review, 
questions and uncertainties persist.
    The frustration that publics and audiences feel in this regard, of 
never knowing ``absolutely'' what occurred, has cropped up in every 
crisis I have been involved in or witnessed. Communicating with the 
American people obviously requires authenticity and transparency to be 
effective, but more importantly, to remain true to the serious nature 
of the responsibility. Otherwise, the audience feels misled.
    In more than one administration, officials have needed to 
acknowledge their communications failures and to state that officials 
in the administration `never intended to mislead the American people.' 
Those statements, albeit sincere, rarely erase the uncertainty that 
lingers in people's minds.

    Question 6. On February 13, 2003, four Americans who were 
Department of Defense contractors on a U.S. Government counter-
narcotics flight mission in Colombia were shot down by the FARC. The 
pilot, a retired member of the U.S. Army's Delta Force, was executed on 
the spot and three Floridians were captured. They were held captive and 
severely tortured for over five and a half years, until they were 
rescued by the Colombian Army. While implementing the peace accord is 
the Colombian Governments primary focus, we still have a group of 
Americans, all former U.S. military, and their families, who were 
subjected to atrocities at the hands of the FARC and have yet to 
receive any closure. Would you work with me to find a solution to make 
these brave Americans whole again?

    Answer. The four U.S. Department of Defense contractors shot down 
by the FARC in 2003 were victims of a heinous crime, and they and their 
families deserve justice. My highest priority is to protect the lives 
and interests of U.S. citizens. If confirmed, I will work closely with 
you on this issue.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Joseph E. Macmanus by Senator Robert Menendez

FARC
        Although there is little doubt that the FARC has a significant 
        amount of financial assets following decades of criminal 
        activity, there has always been an undeniable lack of clarity 
        surrounding the group's wealth. Guerrilla commanders 
        consistently deny that these riches exist.

    Question 1. What is your assessment on the Revolutionary Armed 
Forces of Colombia's (FARC) commitment, as established in Colombia's 
peace agreement, to provide information on their finances? If 
confirmed, do you commit to keeping the U.S. Congress informed about 
your work with the Government of Colombia to address the FARC's illicit 
finances and any efforts to combat illicit financial networks?

    Answer. As part of the 2016 peace agreement, the FARC agreed to 
hand over all property and assets in its possession for use as 
reparations for victims of the conflict. In August 2017, the Colombian 
Government announced it received a 135-page inventory of FARC assets, 
valued at $330 million. In February 2018, the Colombian attorney 
general seized an additional $230 million in undisclosed assets 
allegedly laundered through a series of front companies. After the 
seizure, the office of the attorney general indicated that it is 
pursuing additional investigations into undeclared FARC property and 
assets.
    The U.S. Government believes the FARC is not fully complying with 
its peace accord commitments to provide critical information about the 
cocaine trade and the illicit assets the FARC illicitly obtained during 
the conflict. The U.S. Government continues to reiterate to the 
Government of Colombia that the FARC must do more to comply with such 
commitments.
    I commend the Government of Colombia for diligently investigating 
additional assets not disclosed by the FARC. If confirmed, I will 
ensure the U.S. Government continues to support efforts to find and 
seize undeclared FARC assets. I will also work closely with the U.S. 
Congress on this issue.
Labor Rights
    In July 2016, the AFL-CIO and five Colombian workers' organizations 
filed a petition alleging numerous shortcomings in the implementation 
of the U.S.-Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement (TPA) and argued that 
they constituted a violation of the agreement. Those concerns included 
alleged failures by Colombia to: 1) effectively enforce its labor laws 
in a manner that affects trade and investment; 2) adopt and maintain 
freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right of 
collective bargaining, as called for in the International Labor 
Organization Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work; 
and 3) ensure prompt and transparent proceedings in cases of alleged 
labor rights violations.
    In response, the Department of Labor (DOL) made 19 recommendations 
to Colombia that, if fully implemented, would constitute progress in 
leveling the playing field between American workers and their Colombian 
counterparts. DOL's January 2018 review found that while Colombia had 
made progress in some areas, it must take additional steps to address 
the significant concerns raised in DOL's original report.

    Question 2. What is your assessment of the Colombian Government's 
progress thus far in addressing these labor violations, and will you 
commit to pressing the Colombian Government to fully implement the 19 
DOL recommendations?

    Answer. Since the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) issued its January 
2017 report, the Government of Colombia has made efforts to implement 
the 19 recommendations. For example, Colombia installed an electronic 
case management system in all regional ministry of labor offices and in 
two special administrative offices. In addition, the Colombian 
Government issued a resolution making it mandatory for labor inspectors 
and managers to use and update the system. Colombia also published 
statistics about the total amount of fines collected and the number of 
inspections conducted.
    The Colombian Government has committed to convert the remaining 804 
of its 904 inspector positions to career civil service positions and 
recruit candidates through a public competition by the end of 2018. 
Furthermore, Colombia has agreed to improve and provide relevant 
training to all labor inspectors through a program being implemented by 
the International Labor Organization and funded by DOL.
    If confirmed, I will work with the Colombian Government on matters 
of labor, human rights, and governance as part of our bilateral 
mission. Colombia is a close friend of the United States, and our 
countries have long enjoyed outstanding cooperation on these issues. My 
efforts will include a variety of approaches, including programming, 
diplomatic engagement, and high-level dialogues with the Colombian 
Government.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
            Joseph E. Macmanus by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. As a Public Diplomacy officer, a career diplomat, an 
Ambassador, the advocacy of American values was at the center of my 
work in nearly every assignment.
    In El Salvador in the late 1980s, the fundamental underpinnings of 
our assistance programs were an ongoing discussion of and training in 
the institutions of democratic governance that arise from the rights of 
citizens in a democracy. I oversaw programs for journalists including 
professional ethics, accuracy in reporting, and the role of a free 
press in a democracy. We engaged in training in-country and through 
exchange programs to the United States for journalists, civil society 
leaders, academics, and government officials on civic education and 
civil society. In coordination with INL and USAID, we promoted 
professionalization in law enforcement, the courts, and the military. I 
led a training program for Salvadoran military commanders to SouthCom, 
then based in Panama, to discuss civil-military relations and training 
in relations with the media.I
    n Poland, immediately following the end of the Cold War, I led 
outreach efforts in southern Poland to engage with publics, civil 
society, and local governments on the role of each in a free and 
democratic society. Education in the rights of individuals in a free 
society and the role of a free press were part of our ongoing outreach 
to the media in major Polish media markets. I also ran a large exchange 
program to introduce Polish students and young political leaders to the 
United States to prepare them for leadership roles in a pluralistic and 
democratic Poland. I worked closely with the Jewish community in Krakow 
on the preservation of Jewish antiquities and to advocate for the 
rightful place for Jewish culture in the historical record.
    The promotion of our basic values remains at the center of my work 
and my career. All programs, all advocacy, all policies, come from our 
basic understanding and respect for the Constitution and the Bill of 
Rights. In an international context, this becomes both the framework 
for our work and its goal: to advance respect for human rights and the 
rights of citizens in democracies.
    As I noted in my testimony, rebuilding the social fabric in 
Colombia will be the precondition for any durable progress in the peace 
process. If confirmed, I will keep it at the center of my focus.

    Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in 
Colombia? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if 
confirmed--to promote human rights and democracy in Colombia? What do 
you hope to accomplish through these actions?

    Answer. Colombia continues to make progress on human rights issues, 
including through its efforts to implement the historic 2016 peace 
accord with the FARC. It is hard to overstate the human rights benefits 
of ending the hemisphere's longest-running armed conflict, which cost 
the lives of more than 250,000 and displaced millions. Ending this 
conflict has permitted the Colombian Government to take steps to bring 
justice to victims and their families, fight narcotrafficking and 
organized crime by extending the reach of state institutions to former 
conflict zones, reduce violence, and protect human rights in Colombia.
    If confirmed, I will engage with the Colombian Government, civil 
society, the private sector, and the international community to support 
and encourage Colombia's efforts to secure continued progress on human 
rights.Addressing human rights challenges is essential to build the 
just and lasting peace the Colombian people deserve. Colombia is 
recognizing past human rights violations, and is affirming the right of 
victims to truth, justice, and reparation. Implementation of these 
positive steps will be necessary for sustainable peace and 
reconciliation.
    The United States has a clear interest in supporting a stronger, 
stable Colombia that protects human rights. Peace will better enable 
Colombia to increase its efforts in counternarcotics, counter-
transnational crime, and migration, and to expand our bilateral 
economic relationship.

    Question 3. 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 Colombia in 
advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

    Answer. Colombia is a consolidated democracy undertaking laudable 
efforts to improve the transparency and accountability of its 
governance and to defend democracy abroad. The Colombian Government has 
prioritized human rights and made advances on some important cases, but 
some challenges remain. I consider human rights and social inclusion to 
be issues central to Colombia's ability to secure a just and lasting 
peace, ending decades of conflict.
    If confirmed, I would stress to the Colombian Government the need 
to fill power vacuums in areas formerly controlled by the FARC. The 
Colombian Government's challenge is to establish a comprehensive state 
presence to provide not only security services but also education, 
infrastructure, local governance, and victims' assistance to deny 
criminal groups a foothold and to reverse recent encroachments by 
illegal armed groups. The implementation of a comprehensive plan to 
provide government services in remote areas will be important to 
sustain peace, ensure citizen security, and prevent violence against 
defenders of human rights and social activists. These activists play a 
vital role in ensuring victims and marginalized groups have voice and 
presence in helping shape Colombia's peace accord implementation. I 
would also continue to support the Colombian Government's efforts to 
dismantle the illegal armed groups that are responsible for crimes 
against human rights defenders and civil society activists, and to urge 
thorough investigations and prosecutions into these crimes.
    Colombia's marginalized populations, including Afro-Colombians, 
indigenous people, internally displaced persons, women, and children, 
continue to suffer disproportionately from forced displacement, 
landmines, sexual violence, forced recruitment, and social exclusion. 
The U.S. and Colombian Governments seek to ensure inclusive prosperity 
and equality of opportunities to advance the livelihoods of African 
descendant and indigenous communities in both countries. The inclusion 
of historically marginalized groups in peace accord implementation is 
essential. We are strong proponents of the accord's Ethnic Chapter and 
encourage the Colombian Government to implement all aspects of the 
accords, including measures to guarantee the rights of those most 
affected by conflict.
    Colombia has indicated its commitment to hold accountable those 
responsible for atrocity crimes and crimes involving human rights 
violations and abuses on all sides of the conflict. The U.S. Government 
recognizes and supports the Colombian Government's ongoing efforts at 
investigations and prosecutions. If confirmed, I would encourage the 
Government of Colombia to implement the Special Jurisdiction for Peace, 
intended to hold accountable those responsible for conflict-related 
crimes, promote truth-telling, ensure non-repetition, and provide 
reparations for victims.

    Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in Colombia? If confirmed, what steps will you 
take to pro-actively support the Leahy Law and similar efforts, and 
ensure that provisions of U.S. security assistance and security 
cooperation activities reinforce human rights?

    Answer. Yes. The protection of human rights has long been a core 
component of U.S.-Colombian relations and a central value of our 
foreign policy. The NGO community plays a vital role in shining a light 
on human rights issues and challenges, and has valuable contributions 
and perspectives to share. There is a vibrant community of NGOs and 
civil society organizations focused on human rights issues in Colombia. 
If confirmed, I will continue the United States' longstanding tradition 
of engaging regularly with U.S.-based and Colombian NGOs and civil 
society organizations on these issues to understand their concerns and 
seek their input and proposals.
    The Leahy laws not only advance our human rights agenda, but they 
also promote the professionalization of the security forces with which 
we partner, making them better security partners in the long run. If 
confirmed, I will work closely with the Country Team, the U.S. 
interagency, Colombian Government, and civil society to ensure we 
direct all U.S. assistance to rights-respecting security forces in an 
efficient and effective manner in accordance with U.S. law. In 
accordance with the Leahy law, I will ensure no assistance or equipment 
is provided to Colombia security forces that commit gross violations of 
human rights. Leahy vetting plays an important role in furthering U.S. 
Government programs and objectives on human rights and encourages 
security force professionalization. I will continue to support Embassy 
Bogota's leadership in continuously supporting human rights initiatives 
and sharing best practices.

    Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with 
Colombia to address cases of key political prisoners or persons 
otherwise unjustly targeted by Colombia?

    Answer. It is my understanding that the United States is not aware 
of any political prisoners in Colombia, or unjust targeting of 
individuals. If confirmed, I would certainly engage the Government in 
the event this becomes an issue.

    Question 6. Will you engage with Colombia on matters of human 
rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I will engage with Colombia on matters 
of human rights, civil rights, and governance as part of our bilateral 
mission. Colombia is a close friend of the United States, and our 
countries have long enjoyed outstanding cooperation on a range of 
issues. As a close partner, I will work with the Colombian Government 
to continue to encourage improvements on matters of human rights, civil 
rights, and governance through a variety of approaches, including 
programming, regular diplomatic engagement, and high-level dialogues 
with the Colombian Government. I look forward to continuing and 
expanding upon our close collaboration on these issues in multiple 
fora.

    Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in Colombia?

    Answer. No. We have no financial interests in Colombia.

    Question 10. What will you do to promote, mentor and support your 
staff that come from diverse backgrounds and underrepresented groups in 
the Foreign Service? What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors at Post are fostering an environment that is diverse and 
inclusive?

    Answer. Mentoring and preparing the succeeding generations for 
leadership in the Department must be one of the primary 
responsibilities of the Chief of Mission. No one has greater influence 
in helping shape the purposes, values, and attitudes of the Department 
and the Foreign Service than the leadership in our missions. Mentoring 
should be an interactive engagement with rising employees, 
understanding them as individuals. I have taken this responsibility as 
a primary purpose of my senior years in the Foreign Service, seeking 
out officers to mentor, advise, and for whom I advocate in their 
careers. Senior officers must dedicate a stated percentage of their 
work year in such activities, publicize this to their missions, and 
actively engage staff. Moreover, the work requirements of senior 
officers and supervisors at Post similarly have to include specific 
reference to performance requirements in mentoring and advocacy for 
employees representing diverse and underrepresented groups in the 
Service.
    It is important to impart to senior officers and supervisors the 
values that underlie the role of mentor and adviser for employees, 
especially those representing the diversity of our country. 
Furthermore, establishing an example of such leadership is key to 
encouraging this trait in senior staff. Finally, the Chief of Mission 
has to establish standards of conduct and performance, both in formal 
requirements and by example, which lead the mission to undertake 
diversity mentoring and to foster an environment of openness, equality, 
and diversity.
Support for Peace in Columbia
    Unwavering bipartisan support, across successive administrations, 
has been the cornerstone of U.S. policy to Colombia, first for Plan 
Colombia and today, for the Peace Colombia Initiative. While Plan 
Colombia helped Colombia achieve its peace accord, building a lasting 
peace requires enduring commitments. For this reason, I am deeply 
concerned about the 30 percent cut of $120 million proposed by the 
Trump administration for FY 2019.
    Question 11. If confirmed, will you continue to publicly express 
unwavering U.S. support for peace in Colombia, and will you commit to 
being a forceful advocate for robust funding for Colombia?

    Answer. U.S. assistance is vital to U.S. and Colombian bilateral 
efforts to combat narcotics trafficking and establish lasting peace in 
Colombia. U.S. assistance constitutes only a fraction of Colombia's own 
investment in its peace. Between FY 2000 and FY 2017, U.S. assistance 
totaled roughly $10 billion to support Plan Colombia and its follow-on 
programs. At the same time, Colombia invested billions more, achieving 
notable progress in combating drug trafficking and terrorist activities 
and reestablishing government control over much of its territory.
    Today, Colombia remains one of our strongest partners in the 
region, and we continue to support sustainable peace in Colombia. The 
FY 2019 request provides important and necessary funds to advance U.S. 
interests in Colombia, particularly on peace accord implementation and 
counternarcotics. If confirmed, I will maximize the embassy's use of 
available resources, advocate for continued funding, and express 
unwavering U.S. support for peace in Colombia.
Human Rights Abuses and War Crimes
    In all of my meetings with President Santos, I have repeatedly 
raised the need for Colombian Government to ensure accountability for 
human rights abuses and war crimes committed by the FARC and by state 
actors. The Colombian Government has made important steps in setting up 
its transitional justice mechanism, but 15 months after the accord was 
ratified, no one has been held accountable. Additionally, I am 
concerned that the Colombian Government is not using the 
internationally recognized definition of ``command responsibility'' to 
hold accountable FARC commanders and Colombian generals.
    Question 12. What is your assessment of this issue, and if 
confirmed, will you commit to raise U.S. concerns about human rights 
accountability with the Colombian Government?

    Answer. Ensuring justice and accountability for those responsible 
for conflict-related human rights violations and abuses, including both 
state and non-state actors, is essential to secure a just and lasting 
peace in Colombia. Colombia has made important advances to stand up its 
transitional justice system, including: passing legislation to create 
and implement the Special Jurisdiction for Peace (SJP), designed to 
recognize truth and responsibility and administer justice for conflict-
related crimes constituting serious violations of human rights or 
international humanitarian law; appointing more than 80 magistrates and 
other officials to oversee the SJP and other transitional justice 
bodies; and passing decrees to establish and appoint directors for the 
truth commission and special unit to search for the disappeared.
    While Colombia works to implement its ambitious transitional 
justice framework, the Attorney General's Office has continued to 
investigate and prosecute those responsible for human rights violations 
and abuses committed during the armed conflict. The U.S. Government 
continues to reiterate the importance of prompt and full implementation 
of the SJP and is actively monitoring its implementation, including 
with respect to command responsibility. The Colombian Government has 
publicly stated the SJP will abide by ``international standards.'' I 
commit, if confirmed, to raise U.S. concerns about human rights and 
accountability with the Colombian Government, and reiterate the 
importance of bringing to justice perpetrators of human rights 
violations on all sides.
The Illegal Drug Trade
    The illegal drug trade is a shared problem. While the U.S. always 
needs to do more to address demand for illicit drugs in our country, I 
am very concerned about the sharp increase in illicit coca cultivation 
in recent years. I know the Colombian Government is taking 
unprecedented steps to address this issue and has made important 
progress, but this issue remains a concern. It is even more concerning 
that in the face of these challenges, the Trump administration is 
proposing a 30 percent cut of $120 million for U.S. foreign assistance 
to Colombia, which includes counternarcotics funding.
    Question 13. What steps will you take to prioritize this issue in 
the bilateral relationship, and what additional steps can the U.S. and 
Colombia take to more effectively address the illegal drug trade, 
including related challenges of illicit finance?

    Answer. The Trump administration remains deeply concerned about the 
explosion in Colombian coca cultivation and cocaine production. At the 
U.S.-Colombia High-Level Dialogue (HLD) on March 1, the United States 
and Colombia agreed to expand counternarcotics cooperation over the 
next five years, with the shared goal of reducing Colombia's estimated 
cocaine production and coca cultivation to 50 percent of current levels 
by 2023. If confirmed, I will prioritize work with our Colombian 
counterparts to ensure continued progress in reducing coca cultivation 
and the production of cocaine as agreed to at the HLD.
    Colombia's implementation of the peace accord and current 
counternarcotics strategy can have a lasting impact in addressing the 
illegal drug trade. This is possible if the Government of Colombia 
provides adequate resources for counternarcotics operations and 
alternative development, implements enhanced eradication efforts in 
areas of high coca growth, and increases the effectiveness of 
interdiction operations, including expanding riverine and regional 
maritime operations as well as operations to investigate and dismantle 
narcotrafficking organizations. If confirmed, I would also encourage 
the Colombian Government to continue to use extradition as an essential 
tool against narcotraffickers. It is imperative the Colombian 
Government also hold the FARC accountable for its commitments to 
provide critical information about the cocaine trade and the illicit 
assets the FARC obtained during its years of terrorist activities as 
agreed to under point four of the peace accord.



                               __________


     Response to an Additional Question for the Record Submitted to
               Joseph Macmanus by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

    Question 1. The state of New Hampshire is experiencing an epidemic 
of opioid-related deaths. The State Department's 2017 International 
Narcotics Control Strategy report assessed that Colombia remains the 
second-largest supplier of heroin to the United States. What is your 
assessment of U.S.--Colombia counterdrug cooperation, and how can it be 
improved?

    Answer. While United States Government estimates indicate Colombia 
is the number two supplier of heroin to the United States, over 90 
percent of heroin consumed in the United States originates in Mexico. 
Addressing the opioid crisis is the Department of State's highest drug-
control priority. Irrespective of the amount, illicit heroin 
trafficking from Colombia in the United States damages lives and 
supports criminal activities and organizations throughout the region. 
The Department will continue to rely on our interagency partners to 
monitor Colombian heroin production and work to reduce its role in the 
ongoing opioid crisis in the United States.
    On cooperation, U.S. counternarcotics foreign assistance to 
Colombia is dedicated to reversing the dramatic increase in coca 
cultivation and cocaine production in Colombia since 2013.
    The Governments of Colombia and the United States have collaborated 
effectively to confront narcotics trafficking and other transnational 
crimes for nearly two decades. As a result, violent crime indices such 
as homicides and kidnappings have dropped markedly in recent years. Our 
shared success in security and counternarcotics helped bring the FARC, 
which is extensively involved in the drug trade, to the negotiating 
table and helped make the conclusion of a final peace accord possible.
    On March 1, 2018, senior officials from the United States and 
Colombian Governments met for a High Level Strategic Dialogue to 
discuss our extensive bilateral interests, including counternarcotics 
cooperation. During that meeting, the United States and Colombia came 
to agreement to reduce Colombia's cocaine production and coca 
cultivation to 50 percent of current levels by 2023. If confirmed, I 
would continue to coordinate closely with Colombian authorities to 
support their efforts to reach these goals and address the manufacture 
of all illicit drugs.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
                  Joseph Macmanus by Senator Tim Kaine

    Question 1. As discussed at your nominations hearing, I am 
extremely supportive of Colombia's bid to join the Organization for 
Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Could you please provide 
specifics on what Colombia needs to do to meet its accession benchmarks 
and how the State Department, Embassy in Bogota, and Congress could 
help to support their membership?

    Answer. Colombia's bid to join the market-based democracies of the 
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is 
indicative of how far the country has come. Colombia has progressed 
through the accession process, having passed 20 of 23 committees. The 
remaining committees to pass are the Employment, Labour and Social 
Affairs (ELSAC) committee, the Trade committee, and the Economic and 
Development Review committee (EDRC). The EDRC is a ``capstone'' review 
committee that will consider Colombia once it has passed all other 
committees.
    I understand that the entire U.S. interagency continues to guide 
Colombia as it completes and implements the technical requirements to 
qualify for membership in the OECD. Embassy Bogota has been working 
closely with Colombian officials to best utilize the $2 million in 
Department of Labor funds pledged for additional technical assistance 
to meet requirements for accession (these funds were contingent on 
Colombia providing equivalent matching funds).
    The four major areas identified for improvement in the ELSAC review 
include labor informality and subcontracting, labor law enforcement, 
collective bargaining, and violence against unionists. Regarding the 
Trade committee, the State Department continues to work with USTR and 
Colombian officials to ensure there is clarity and coordination among 
the parties regarding the outstanding issues Colombia is working to 
address, including truck scrappage, pharmaceutical, and copyright laws 
and policies. If confirmed, I would continue to work closely with 
Colombia to meet its accession benchmarks.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
               Judge Edward Prado by Senator Marco Rubio

    Question 1. The United States Government has been concerned about 
illicit activities taking place in the Tri-Border Area (TBA), where 
borders of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay meet. If confirmed, how 
would you tackle the criminality challenges presented in this area, 
including money laundering, arms trafficking, and trade in counterfeit 
and contraband goods?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would make cooperation on the fights 
against terrorism and drug trafficking, and the security of our people, 
including cybersecurity, my priorities. The United States and Argentina 
have a mutual interest in combatting the trafficking of illegal drugs 
and weapons and safeguarding the security of our citizens. It is my 
understanding that the U.S. Government provides training and technical 
assistance for interagency personnel at Argentine-established 
Intelligence Fusion Centers nationwide and for a recently launched 
Northwest Border Task Force focused on Transnational Organized Crime 
and Counternarcotics. The U.S. and Argentina share concerns regarding 
cybersecurity, including critical infrastructure protection, 
international security in cyberspace, and cybercrime. U.S. Government 
cyber experts established the Argentina-U.S. Cyber Policy Working Group 
to address these concerns. The U.S. Embassy has a Resident Legal 
Advisor to assist Argentine law enforcement with investigations, case 
building and advocacy, and prosecutions of complex crimes such as drug 
trafficking, money laundering, and other forms of illicit finance.

    Question 2. The National Endowment for Democracy recently released 
a report titled, ``Sharp Power: Rising Authoritarian Influence,'' which 
detailed Chinese and Russian influence in four young democracies in 
Latin America and Central Europe, one of which was Argentina. The 
report examines Chinese influence over local media and academia. Is 
this an issue you are focused on? What specifically, if confirmed, 
would you do to counter Chinese Government influence in Argentina and 
throughout the region?

    Answer. As the Secretary noted during his recent trip to the 
region, China is now the largest trading partner of Chile, Brazil, and 
Peru. While this trade has brought benefits, some unfair trading 
practices have also harmed these countries' manufacturing sectors, 
generating unemployment and lowering wages for workers. If confirmed, I 
will work tirelessly to demonstrate that the U.S. model for investment 
and trade--based on mutually beneficial goals that help both sides 
grow, develop, and become more prosperous--is the preferred trading and 
investment model.



                               __________


     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
             Judge Edward Prado by Senator Robert Menendez

AMIA
    For almost 25 years, the suspects in the AMIA massacre in Buenos 
Aires have lived openly in Iran, where some of held senior government 
positions.
    Question 1. How will you support Argentina's efforts to pressure 
Tehran to turn over the bombing suspects, and to enforce the Interpol 
Red Notices seeking their arrests?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would make clear that the United States 
will always stand with the victims of the Asociaci"n Mutual Israelita 
Argentina (AMIA) bombing, with their families, and with the Argentine 
people and their government as they work with the international 
community to see justice done in the case of the July 18, 1994 attack. 
The AMIA bombing was a brutal attack on Argentina's Jewish community, 
on Buenos Aires, and on all Argentines, killing 85 people and injuring 
hundreds more. We must always remember that it came 28 months after the 
March 17, 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, which 
killed 29 people and injured hundreds more. If confirmed, I would also 
make clear that the Iranian Government continues to bear a solemn 
responsibility to cooperate fully with Argentine authorities as they 
work to bring the perpetrators to justice. Iran's involvement in the 
Western Hemisphere remains a matter of concern, and the administration 
continues to counter its malign activities in the region.

    Question 2. The unsolved murder of prosecutor Nisman poses a 
challenge to public confidence in the rule of law in Argentina. 
President Mauricio Macri's election raised expectations for a 
resolution to the case. Why is this murder so hard to solve, and is 
there any role for the United States, either in applying diplomatic 
pressure to demonstrate our interest in the case, or offering 
investigative, including forensic, support?

    Answer. The 2015 death of Special Prosecutor Alberto Nisman, who 
dedicated the last decade of his life to the pursuit of those 
responsible for an appalling act of terrorism in our hemisphere, was 
deeply troubling. If confirmed, I would continue the U.S. call for a 
complete, transparent, and impartial investigation into Mr. Nisman's 
death and offer U.S. assistance on the investigation to Argentine 
authorities. Under President Mauricio Macri, Argentina's Government and 
its courts have renewed focus on the investigations into the bombing 
and the death of Mr. Nisman and they have since made progress in the 
investigation. A Gendarmerie report issued September 20, 2017 concluded 
Mr. Nisman was murdered, and a federal judge in December 2017 reached 
the same conclusion. If confirmed, I would continue to offer U.S. 
support to Argentina and stress our interest in assisting its efforts 
to find justice.

    Question 3. Under the Macri administration, U.S. human rights 
groups, including Human Rights Watch, have criticized Argentina on 
several occasions on issues such as the pre-trial detention of 
indigenous rights activist Milagro Sala; the pre-trial detention of 
former senior government officials; and alleged heavy-handed policing. 
What will you do to evaluate Argentina's human rights climate, and 
persuade the Government to respect the rights of criminal defendants, 
protestors and individuals pursued by law enforcement personnel?

    Answer. The United States and Argentina share a commitment to 
democratic governance, transparency, and human rights that make us 
natural allies in addressing regional and global challenges. We 
collaborate closely in multilateral organizations and initiatives, 
including the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Inter-American 
Human Rights System, the Open Government Partnership, the Global Anti-
Corruption Coalition, and the Global Equality Fund. As the Chair of the 
Prado committee in 1993 and just recently as Chair Emeritus of a new 
committee appointed by the Chief Justice, I had the responsibility of 
overseeing recommendations on how to improve the quality of 
representation guaranteed by our Constitution. I have always been 
concerned with the rights of individuals in a free society. If 
confirmed, I will continue my support of these human rights and seek to 
strengthen our bilateral cooperation and encourage continued Argentine 
leadership on democracy and human rights in the region, particularly in 
Venezuela and Cuba.
    Argentine President Mauricio Macri has made human rights a 
priority, and in December 2017 he unveiled a new national human rights 
strategy focused on five thematic areas that include non-
discrimination; universal access to human rights; public security; 
dictatorship-era memory, truth, and justice initiatives; and cultural 
commitment to human rights. If confirmed, I will work with the 
Argentine Government to encourage robust implementation of the national 
human rights strategy to ensure Argentine authorities address the 
country's principal human rights issues.

    Question 4. In Latin America, the United States has continued to 
defend human rights and democratic norms, including in Cuba and 
Venezuela, and called upon our Latin American partners to do the same. 
Outside the region, however, the U.S. commitment to these principles is 
less clear. How will you press Argentina to hold Venezuelan President 
Nicol s Maduro accountable for abusing civil liberties and democratic 
institutions when the United States is largely silent regarding similar 
misconduct by leaders such as Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Rodrigo Duterte, 
Abdel Fattah el-Sisi and Vladimir Putin?

    Answer. The Argentine Government has spoken out forcefully about 
the need for the Venezuelan regime to permit the citizens of Venezuela 
to recover their liberties through free and fair elections. Argentine 
authorities have worked within the Organization of American States; the 
Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR) trading bloc; and through the 
Lima Group, a group of like-minded South American countries, to support 
the efforts of the Venezuelan people to restore democracy in their 
country. President Mauricio Macri has long been a sharp critic of the 
Venezuelan Government and has taken concrete steps to increase 
diplomatic and financial pressure on the Venezuelan regime. If 
confirmed, I will work closely with the Argentine Government as 
Argentina, the United States, and the vast majority of governments in 
the hemisphere work together to help the Venezuelans restore the 
democratic rights currently being denied them by their government.

    Question 5. In February, Secretary Tillerson said the Monroe 
Doctrine had ``clearly been a success'' that is ``as relevant today as 
it was the day it was written.'' What is your view of the Monroe 
Doctrine?

    Answer. As the Secretary said, the Monroe Doctrine allowed for the 
development of the shared values of democracy and human rights for the 
people of the hemisphere. We work together as partners with our 
neighbors in this hemisphere to advance shared priorities including 
security, economic and energy prosperity, and democratic governance.

    Question 6. How should the United States address its previous 
interventions in Latin America, including support for dictatorships in 
South America, including in Argentina during the ``Dirty War''?

    Answer. As a matter of policy, the United States supports 
accountability for gross human rights violations, and to this end 
Argentina's continuing efforts with memory, truth, and justice 
commissions. Since 2016, the United States has embarked on a 
comprehensive effort to identify additional records related to human 
rights abuses committed under Argentina's dictatorship. The 
declassification project represents an historic effort by U.S. 
Government agencies and departments to search, identify, review for 
public access, and provide records that shed light on human rights 
abuses in Argentina between 1975 and 1984. Moreover, the United States 
provided help to many of those who defended and sought to advance 
greater respect for human rights in Argentina during those years. The 
United States continues to defend and advance democracy and human 
rights throughout the world. As a federal judge, I have always been 
sensitive that the rights of individuals guaranteed by a democratic 
government are recognized and enforced. If confirmed, I will commit to 
speak out whenever universal human rights are denied or threatened.

    Question 7. You would arrive in Argentina arguably at the zenith of 
its regional and global influence, as it presides over the G-20. How 
would you assure that Argentina is a productive steward of the global 
agenda on critical issues such as climate change and free trade 
promotion?

    Answer. Argentina's G-20 presidency is an extraordinary opportunity 
for the country to show global leadership and promote the Government's 
ongoing economic reforms globally. If confirmed, I will continue our 
Embassy's efforts to work closely with Argentina to coordinate on our 
shared objectives in the G-20.

    Question 8. What advice should the United States offer to help 
Argentina strengthen its investment climate, attract U.S. firms and 
replicate the U.S. shale revolution?

    Answer. Argentina is estimated to have the world's second largest 
shale gas resources and fourth largest shale oil resources. Most of 
this unconventional resource potential is located in the Vaca Muerta 
formation in Patagonia (mostly in Neuquen Province), which many have 
compared to the prolific Eagle Ford and Bakken plays in the United 
States. U.S. companies, including ExxonMobil and Chevron, have begun to 
explore small, pilot contracts in Vaca Muerta. The Department of 
State's Bureau of Energy Resources continues to provide technical and 
regulatory expertise to Argentine counterparts at both the provincial 
and federal level. If confirmed, I would continue to foster this 
collaborative partnership, which can generate opportunities for U.S. 
oil and gas firms and help improve hemispheric energy security.

    Question 9. Is there any contradiction between Argentina's 
ambitious Paris agreement commitments and its investments in the Vaca 
Muerta shale play?

    Answer. Argentina's long-term development plans involve balancing 
development of its Vaca Muerta shale oil and gas resources with new 
Paris Agreement-compatible infrastructure projects, such as renewable 
energy generation. Climate change mitigation and adaptation remain 
priorities for the Argentine Government, which has taken a whole of 
government approach to the issue via President Macri's 13-ministry 
``Climate Change Cabinet.''

    Question 10.  Since the beginning of 2017, support for the United 
States in Argentina has diminished markedly. Polls by Gallup show only 
a 13 percent approval rating for the U.S. Government. So far, shifting 
public opinion has not appeared to erode the diplomatic relationship, 
but it is not clear that is sustainable. How would you address rising 
public disapproval of the United States?

    Answer. Educational exchange programs represent one area of robust 
cooperation, with more than 2,000 Argentine students studying in the 
United States and more than 4,500 U.S. students in Argentina during the 
2013-2014 academic year. This is one of the most fundamental areas for 
U.S. direct engagement with Argentines: common understanding based on 
personal contacts; people-to-people connections based on common 
academic, professional, and cultural interests. If confirmed, I will 
ensure the Embassy works with the Argentine Government and private 
sector to strengthen these education exchange programs and align them 
with Argentina's work force development needs. I will continue to 
expand and strengthen these partnerships, which ultimately improve not 
only understanding between the United States and Argentina, but also 
help strengthen the economies of both nations. Additionally, I have 
personally worked closely with the judicial branch of Argentina and 
have participated in numerous workshops and seminars throughout the 
years. If confirmed, it is my intent to continue working closely with 
the lawyers and judges of Argentina to help improve the judicial 
system.

    Question 11.  President Macri came into office promising to 
rebalance Argentina's international relationships, by distancing 
Argentina from China and Russia and strengthening ties with its 
traditional allies, including the United States. Instead, Argentina's 
relationship with China has remained tightknit. Given President Macri's 
preference for doing business with the United States, what can we do to 
compete with Chinese influence in Argentina? Is the U.S. Government 
providing competitive financing to meet Argentina's infrastructure 
needs and generate opportunities for U.S. companies?

    Answer. The United States remains, by a large margin, the number 
one source of foreign direct investment in Argentina and significant 
investment opportunities exist for U.S. companies in Argentina's 
infrastructure, energy, health, agriculture, information technology, 
and mining sectors. Historically, challenges to greater investment for 
U.S. companies in Argentina have included regulatory coherence, high 
financing costs, and weak intellectual property rights protections. 
President Macri has declared Argentina to be open for business and has 
welcomed foreign trade and investment. The United States continues to 
work closely with the Argentine Government to improve the business 
climate, and, if confirmed, I would continue to advocate for reforms 
that will maintain a level playing field for U.S. companies doing 
business in Argentina.

    Question 12. Are we providing adequate support for Argentina's law 
enforcement institutions and armed forces as the country increasingly 
grapples with drug transshipment?

    Answer. The Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement 
Affairs (INL) conducts a $2.2 million Argentina program inclusive of 
all activities through Fiscal Year 2019. INL funds capacity building to 
the Argentine Government's Fusion Centers and funds the Drug 
Enforcement Administration to train and mentor Argentine law 
enforcement and justice officials to support the counter-narcotics 
focused Northwest Border Task Force, which has already demonstrated 
successes combatting transnational organized crime and interdicting 
narcotics. Treasury's Office of Technical Assistance is helping 
Argentina's Financial Information Unit improve its capacity to 
supervise financial institutions and detect money laundering. If 
confirmed, I would continue to encourage this relationship of strong 
partnership and collaboration to achieve our mutual security and law 
enforcement goals. As a former United States Attorney with drug-
trafficking prosecution experience, I intend to work closely with the 
Regional Resident Legal Advisor to assist in helping Argentine law 
enforcement and prosecutors investigate and pursue their cases.

    Question 13.  As in many parts of the world, the U.S. Embassy in 
Buenos Aires is sometimes perceived as part of Argentine elite culture, 
disengaged from the urban poor and rural populations, and disinterested 
in the lives of the one-in-three Argentines who live in poverty. This 
stereotype is unfair, but not entirely so. How would you ensure that 
the United States is engaging diverse communities in Argentina, and 
that the embassy's political and economic analysis reflects many 
viewpoints, including those critical of the Macri Government and of the 
United States?

    Answer. As a Latino from a disadvantaged community, I overcame many 
challenges in becoming the first in my family to attend college. I 
believe my diverse life experiences will help me relate to and engage 
with the urban poor and rural populations of Argentina. For many years, 
the United States Embassy in Buenos Aires has made outreach to 
Argentina's 23 provinces a priority. Officers from across the Mission, 
including from the economic, political, public diplomacy, and consular 
sections, engage with counterparts throughout the country to listen to 
Argentina voices, and to promote U.S. policies and tell America's 
story. If confirmed, I would plan to participate personally in these 
efforts. They are among the best ways we have to engage diverse 
populations and to hear from Argentines with many different points of 
view. In addition, a network of 13 U.S.-Argentina Bi-national Centers 
(BNCs) located in 13 of Argentina's 23 provinces provide English 
language training and cultural programs to approximately 15,000 
students. Ten BNCs administer an English scholarship program to provide 
English teaching and learning to under-served student populations, 
creating a pipeline of students for future exchange programs and 
enhanced workforce readiness. If confirmed, I will ensure the United 
States continues these and other efforts to build closer people-to-
people ties and deepen our partnerships with the diverse people of the 
Western Hemisphere, including Argentina, to address common challenges.

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
           Judgfe Edward Prado by Senator Benjamin L. Cardin

    Question 1. What are the most important actions you have taken in 
your career to date to promote human rights and democracy? What has 
been the impact of your actions?

    Answer. As a former public defender and prosecutor, I appreciated 
first-hand the importance of people's rights and the importance of the 
rule of law in a democratic society. In these roles, I both enforced 
our nation's laws and protected human rights with the inherent dignity 
and respect of every person in mind.
    That appreciation has continued in my position as a United States 
Judge where I have dealt with issues involving human rights. From 
police brutality, to discrimination cases, to voter I.D. laws, I have 
always made it a policy to abide by the rule of law and see to it that 
all citizens' rights are protected. These rulings over the past 35 
years have had a positive effect on thousands of people's lives.

    Question 2. What are the most pressing human rights issues in 
Argentina? What are the most important steps you expect to take--if 
confirmed--to advance human rights and democracy in Argentina? What do 
you hope to accomplish through these actions?

    Answer. The United States and Argentina share a commitment to 
democratic governance, transparency, and human rights that make us 
natural allies in addressing regional and global challenges. We 
collaborate closely in multilateral organizations and initiatives, 
including the United Nations Human Rights Council, the Inter-American 
Human Rights System, the Open Government Partnership, the Global Anti-
Corruption Coalition, and the Global Equality Fund. If confirmed, I 
will seek to strengthen our bilateral cooperation and encourage 
continued Argentine leadership on democracy and human rights in the 
region, particularly in Venezuela and Cuba.
    The most significant human rights problems in Argentina as outlined 
in the most recent State Department Human Rights Report include reports 
of official corruption and of torture by federal and provincial police; 
harsh and life-threatening prison conditions; interference in judicial 
independence; child labor and forced labor, despite concerted Argentine 
Government efforts to combat it; and gender-based violence. Argentine 
President Mauricio Macri has made human rights a priority for his 
administration, and in December 2017, he unveiled a new national human 
rights strategy focused on five thematic areas that include non-
discrimination; universal access to human rights; public security; 
dictatorship-era memory, truth, and justice initiatives; and cultural 
commitment to human rights. If confirmed, I will work with the 
Argentine Government to encourage robust implementation of the national 
human rights strategy to ensure Argentine authorities address the 
country's principal human rights issues.
    Recognizing its own challenges, Argentina has been a leader in 
working to address child labor, and hosted the successful IV Global 
Conference on the Sustained Eradication of Child Labor in November 
2017, where Department of Labor Under Secretary for International 
Affairs Martha Newton advanced U.S. multilateral and bilateral labor 
objectives. She underscored the U.S. commitment to combating child 
labor, forced labor, and human trafficking, announcing a conference 
pledge of $253 million, including FY 2017 funding from the Department 
of Labor and Department of State for global programs. If confirmed, I 
intend to maintain cooperation with Argentina during its G20 presidency 
in 2018 and support President Macri's initiatives aimed at workplace-
based training for Argentine youth.

    Question 3. f 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 Argentina in 
advancing human rights, civil society and democracy in general?

    Answer. The administration of President Mauricio Macri has made 
confronting corruption a top priority, and Argentine law provides for 
criminal penalties for corruption by public officials. Nonetheless, 
multiple reports allege that executive, legislative, and judicial 
officials have engaged in corrupt practices with impunity, suggesting a 
failure to implement the law effectively. Weak institutions and an 
ineffective and politicized judicial system have undermined systematic 
attempts to curb corruption. If confirmed, I would work to encourage 
transparency and strong and stable government institutions in 
Argentina.

    Question 4. Are you committed to meeting with human rights, civil 
society and other non-governmental organizations in the U.S. and with 
local human rights NGOs in Argentina?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to sustained engagement with a 
broad spectrum of society in Argentina, including human rights 
activists, civil society, religious groups, and the organizations that 
represent them.

    Question 5. Will you and your embassy team actively engage with 
Argentina to address cases of key political prisoners or persons 
otherwise unjustly targeted by Argentina?

    Answer. There are no reports of political prisoners or detainees in 
Argentina. If I am confirmed, my Embassy team and I would actively 
engage with the Government of Argentina should such issues arise.

    Question 6. Will you engage with Argentina on matters of human 
rights, civil rights and governance as part of your bilateral mission?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will engage with the Argentine Government 
on matters of human rights, civil rights, and governance as part of our 
bilateral mission.

    Question 7. Do you commit to bring to the committee's attention 
(and the State Department Inspector General) any change in policy or 
U.S. actions that you suspect may be influenced by any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the business or 
financial interests of any senior White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 8. Do you commit to inform the committee if you have any 
reason to suspect that a foreign government, head of state, or foreign-
controlled entity is taking any action in order to benefit any of the 
President's business or financial interests, or the interests of senior 
White House staff?

    Answer. I commit to comply with all relevant federal ethics laws, 
regulations, and rules, and to raise concerns that I may have through 
appropriate channels.

    Question 9. Do you or do any members of your immediate family have 
any financial interests in Argentina?

    Answer. Neither I nor any member of my family have financial 
interests in Argentina or any other foreign country.

    Question 10. Research from private industry demonstrates that, when 
managed well, diversity makes business teams better both in terms of 
creativity and in terms of productivity. What will you do to promote, 
mentor and support your staff that come from diverse backgrounds and 
underrepresented groups in the Foreign Service?

    Answer. As a minority myself, I am very sensitive to the fact that 
minorities are underrepresented in the State Department and will do all 
I can to increase representation and involvement from people of all 
backgrounds. Coming from a poor Latino neighborhood where most students 
did not go on to college and being the first in my family to attend 
college, I have worked with student groups that aim to help encourage 
minority students to attend and stay in college. I believe I serve as a 
role model for many Latino students and as an example of what can be 
accomplished if you work hard.
    Furthermore, I have actively demonstrated my commitment to 
promoting diversity in the hiring and mentorship of my almost 80 law 
clerks during my 35 years on the bench. My clerks come from all 
different backgrounds and experiences. I have mentored them in my 
chambers and throughout their legal careers. I hope to continue my 
mentorship role in supporting the development of my staff, particularly 
those from underrepresented groups.

    Question 11. What steps will you take to ensure each of the 
supervisors at the Embassy are fostering an environment that is diverse 
and inclusive?

    Answer. I intend to work closely with staff to insure that we are 
helping new and young State Department employees gain the experience 
necessary to have a successful career within the State Department. I 
intend to play a direct role in mentoring these individuals and helping 
them in any way I can to go on to become leaders in the Foreign 
Service. I also plan on being visible and accessible to all my staff in 
the embassy. I believe that by playing this active role and by leading 
by example, the supervisors under my direction will do the same in our 
pursuit of a common mission.

    Question 12. China in Argentina/Latin America: In the past 18 
months, U.S. public standing in Argentina has plummeted and in a recent 
poll, only 13 percent of Argentines had a favorable view of the United 
States. This dramatic development comes at a time when China is 
increasing its role in Latin America. China's trade with Argentina 
surpasses that of the U.S.; China provided $20 billion in 
infrastructure financing in 2014; China is providing security funding 
to facilitate the purchase of Chinese equipment; and China's Confucius 
Institute are seeking to manipulate curricula and public opinion in 
Argentine universities. What is your assessment of China's role in 
Argentina?

    Answer. China has a longstanding trade relationship with Argentina 
and historically has alternated with the United States as being 
Argentina's second largest goods trading partner after Brazil. The 
United States, however, engages in a larger services trade with 
Argentina, and is by far the number one source of foreign direct 
investment in Argentina. Trade between Argentina and China has 
historically centered on exports of agricultural and mineral commodity 
products to China in exchange for Argentine imports of higher value 
chain products. President Macri has declared Argentina open for 
business and has welcomed foreign trade and investment from the United 
States, Europe, China, and others.

    Question 13. If confirmed, will you make this issue a priority?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would work to demonstrate that the U.S. 
model for investment and trade is the preferred trading and investment 
model, as it is based on mutually beneficial goals that help both 
partners grow, develop, and become more prosperous.

    Question 14. What steps will you take to address Chinese influence 
in Argentina?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would continue to advocate for reforms that 
would maintain a level playing field for U.S. companies doing business 
in Argentina. I will advocate for investments and trade that meet high 
standards in terms of transparency, adherence to anti-corruption 
standards, debt sustainability, labor rights, environmental best 
practices, and the needs and concerns of local communities.

    Question 15. Security Assistance Budget Cuts/U.S. Influence: The 
U.S. provides very little foreign assistance to Argentina, but the 
little we do goes a long way and offers us significant influence. One 
key budget is our international counternarcotics and law enforcement 
budget, which President Trump has proposed to cut--again. These funds 
facilitate strategic cooperation on a range of issues, including 
combatting illicit finance and money laundering. In the current budget 
climate, what will you do to ensure continued funding for Argentina?

    Answer. The United States and Argentina have a mutual interest in 
combatting the trafficking of illegal drugs and safeguarding the 
security of our citizens. If confirmed, I would place among my top 
priorities cooperation in the fight against terrorism and drug 
trafficking, and the promotion of the security of the American people, 
including their cybersecurity. I would also advocate for the necessary 
resources to ensure our cooperation with Argentina continues.

    Question 16. At a time when the Chinese are offering security 
assistance to Argentina, what will you do to maintain our influence?

    Answer. Fundamentally, our influence derives from our values. 
Argentina and the United States share democratic traditions and values, 
and how we apply them in providing services to our citizens extends to 
how we police our streets and defend our national interests. When the 
Argentine Navy lost a submarine, the ARA San Juan, in the South 
Atlantic, last November, the United States Government, and the United 
States Navy, arrived first on the scene to lend support. When the 
Argentine Ministry of Security made combatting transnational organized 
crime and interdicting narcotics in northwestern Argentina a priority, 
our embassy in Buenos Aires worked together with the Drug Enforcement 
Administration (DEA) and other U.S. law enforcement agencies to help 
the Argentines develop a l counter-narcotics focused Northwest Border 
Task Force that is becoming a model for similar centers elsewhere in 
Argentina.
    The Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs 
(INL) now conducts a $2.2 million program, inclusive of all activities 
through Fiscal Year 2019, that funds capacity building and DEA efforts 
to train and mentor Argentine law enforcement and justice officials 
working to improve Argentine public security, and Northwest Border Task 
Force has already demonstrated successes combatting transnational 
organized crime and interdicting narcotics.
    The benefits Argentina derives from a close security and public 
safety relationship with the United States far exceed those available 
to it elsewhere; that is why the Macri administration prefers 
cooperation with the United States over other foreign partners, such as 
Russia and China, and that is why our security cooperation has 
flourished in the two years since Macri came into office.
    Our INL Argentina program is a unique model of low cost, high 
impact foreign assistance in which the Argentine Government shares in 
the cost of all INL trainings, thus maximizing our very modest 
investment in? shared security priorities of combatting corruption and 
transnational crime including counter-narcotics. Programs such as this 
one show that the U.S. model for security cooperation--based on shared 
values and mutually beneficial goals that help both sides--makes sense 
for both countries. Treasury's Office of Technical Assistance is 
helping Argentina's Financial Information Unit improve its capacity to 
supervise financial institutions and detect money laundering. If 
confirmed, I would encourage this relationship of strong partnership 
and collaboration to achieve our mutual security and law enforcement 
goals.

    Question 17. Israeli Embassy and AMIA Terrorist Attacks: In my last 
meeting with President Macri, I raised the need for Argentina and the 
international community to make more progress in holding accountable 
the perpetrators of the 1994 bombing of AMIA Jewish community center. 
This certainly includes the 6 Iranian officials that were previously 
subject to Interpol Red Notices. There has certainly been progress into 
the murder of Alberto Nisman, the prosecutor who was handling the AMIA 
case. But, there has been limited progress on the actual attacks. What 
support will you provide for the investigations?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will make clear that the United States 
stands with the victims of the Asociaci"n Mutual Israelita Argentina 
(AMIA) bombing, with their families, and with the Argentine people and 
their government as they work with the international community to see 
justice done in the case of the July 18, 1994 attack. The AMIA bombing 
was a brutal attack on Argentina's Jewish community, on Buenos Aires, 
and on all Argentines, killing 85 people and injuring hundreds more. 
This attack came 28 months after the March 17, 1992 bombing of the 
Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires that killed 29 people and injured 
hundreds more. If confirmed, I would also make clear that the Iranian 
Government continues to bear a solemn responsibility to cooperate fully 
with Argentine authorities as they work to bring the perpetrators to 
justice.

    Question 18. Will you continue to ensure that it is a priority in 
the U.S.-Argentina relationship?

    Answer. If confirmed, I would ensure that this is a priority and 
would offer U.S. support to Argentina and stress our interest in 
assisting their efforts to find justice. Given my experience as a 
judge, a participant in State Department rule of law programming, and 
my relationship with the legal community of Argentina, I look forward 
to working with the Government of Argentina to bring the perpetrators 
to justice.

                               __________


     Response to An Additional Question for the Record Submitted to
              Judge Edward Prado by Senator Jeanne Shaheen

    Question 1. For several years, a New Hampshire-based company, TIG 
Insurance, has sought unsuccessfully to resolve an outstanding dispute 
with Argentina over reinsurance contracts purchased by the Government 
from TIG in the 1980's. Although U.S. courts have sided with TIG in 
several cases, the Argentinian Government has yet to meaningfully 
engage with TIG on this issue, and thus this is the oldest unpaid claim 
against the Government of Argentina owed to a U.S. company. If 
confirmed, would you work with my office to see that this matter 
settled?

    Answer. I am aware of the ongoing legal dispute between TIG and the 
Government of Argentina. If confirmed, I can assure you that I will 
work tirelessly to support U.S. companies doing business in Argentina. 
Also, if confirmed, I look forward to working with your office on this 
matter.
                               __________


                              NOMINATIONS

                              ----------                              


                       WEDNESDAY, APRIL 11, 2018

                                       U.S. Senate,
                            Committee on Foreign Relations,
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in 
Room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Jeff Flake, 
presiding.
    Present: Senators Flake [presiding], Gardner, Young, 
Shaheen, Kaine, and Booker.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF FLAKE, 
                   U.S. SENATOR FROM ARIZONA

    Senator Flake. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations 
committee will come to order.
    After some scheduling snafus and snow days that forced 
Senator Booker and me out with snowball fights on the lawn and 
everything else, but it was not very conducive to hearings and 
people being here on time. So we appreciate your indulgence in 
having this hearing postponed until now.
    But we are considering nominees to serve as the Assistant 
Secretary of State for the Bureau of International Narcotics 
and Law Enforcement Affairs and Ambassador to South Sudan, Mr. 
Hushek, who some time has passed since we have met, but I am 
grateful to you and Ms. Madison for taking the time to meet 
with me prior to this hearing.
    The Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement, 
or INL, is tasked with the responsibility for a number of 
important issues that lie at the heart of some of Congress' and 
the administration's priorities. These include helping foreign 
countries combat transnational crime, the illicit drug trade, 
human trafficking, and wildlife trafficking. I look forward to 
hearing how Ms. Madison will work to prioritize the many issues 
that, if confirmed, will fall under her purview and how 
Congress can work with INL to achieve its mission.
    We are also considering the nomination of a new Ambassador 
to South Sudan when the Government is, by all accounts, 
abdicating its responsibility to represent its people. There 
has never been a greater need for skilled diplomacy in the 
world's newest country. The committee stands eager to hear 
about the impact that the deteriorating manmade humanitarian 
crisis--what impact this has on U.S. interests in the region 
and what we might do to be able to turn the tide there. We are 
so grateful that we are going to have an Ambassador to South 
Sudan. It has been needed.
    I thank each of you for your time and sharing your 
expertise with us.
    With that, we will recognize Senator Booker for opening 
comments.

               STATEMENT OF HON. CORY A. BOOKER,
                  U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY

    Senator Booker. Thank you very much, Chairman Flake.
    And I just want to reiterate I really appreciate your 
flexibility. I was just told that one of you were overseas and 
rearranged your schedule. It is a lot to go through, a lot of 
logistics. I just appreciate your patience with us and the many 
extraneous circumstances.
    I am grateful as always to Chairman Flake for his 
leadership and focus and what he brings to the table.
    The two before me--your years of service speak for 
themselves, your commitment to country, as well as to the 
larger cause of humanity. Should you be confirmed, you will 
both arrive at these positions in challenging and very 
difficult times.
    Ms. Madison, the bureau you will lead, if confirmed, will 
experience savage budget cuts, about 40 percent, if the 
President's budget is adopted. It is something that I think is 
a cause for concern. The budget comes at a time when heroin and 
cocaine use is increasing, along with a number of heroin-
related deaths in recent years. This is a real crisis being 
felt in communities all across our country, including in New 
Jersey. There are global supply chains and markets for these 
illicit substances that demand robust multilateral cooperation 
as well as enforcement that I believe will be forfeited for 
more punitive measures against individuals as opposed to making 
recovery difficult for consumers and investing in the kind of 
things that really make a difference. Your strategies, your 
wisdom, and your insight is really essential to help us to 
advance success at a time that frankly I am just frustrated 
that we are not making more progress.
    Mr. Hushek, if confirmed, you are literally going into a 
war zone, and I am concerned about your safety, the safety of 
our personnel in such hardship posts. My concern is compounded 
actually by not only the deteriorating effects in South Sudan 
but I just feel that we have no articulated strategy to deal 
with this crisis. And more than that, I have to say I am very 
concerned about this administration's concern about this 
crisis. There is a moral outrage going on on planet earth at a 
scale and level of gravity that should anguish the souls of 
every American. But there is a lack of attention in this 
administration coming from the top. There are demeaning and 
degrading comments spewing from the White House that undermine 
the larger diplomatic efforts.
    South Sudan is at a point where all of us, regardless of 
country--this is a test of the moral will of humanity. And I 
just feel that you are going into a challenge that I believe 
you can make a profound difference.
    And so I just want to say as an American, as a Senator, but 
even more so as a human being that I pray for your success 
under these circumstances, and I am looking forward to hearing 
you maybe being able to articulate with more clarity what the 
administration's strategy is. Your job is one of the more 
singularly important ones for alleviating suffering on this 
planet and ending a nightmare that is unimaginable frankly for 
those who have not witnessed a broad scale famine and suffering 
like we are seeing in South Sudan. I am angry that my country 
who has led with light and generosity and love is not showing 
that in this case.
    So I want to thank you both again for being here. I am very 
much looking forward to having a conversation, and I will pass 
it back to our chairman.
    Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Booker.
    We will now turn to our nominees, the first nominee, 
Kirsten Madison, Deputy Director of Foreign and Defense Policy 
Studies with the American Enterprise Institute. She is well 
known to this committee having served as Deputy Staff Director 
just a few years ago and as a professional staff member under 
the leadership of former Chairman Jesse Helms. She also has 
previous experience at State, the NSC, and the Coast Guard.
    Our second nominee is Thomas Hushek, career diplomat, who 
is serving as the Acting Assistant Secretary of State in the 
State Department's Bureau of Conflict and Stabilization 
Operations. He has served in eight countries overseas, 
including as Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. embassies of 
Tajikistan and Micronesia. Additionally, he has completed two 
tours in Afghanistan.
    With that, we will recognize Ms. Madison.

    STATEMENT OF KIRSTEN DAWN MADISON, OF FLORIDA, TO BE AN 
 ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF STATE, INTERNATIONAL NARCOTICS AND LAW 
                      ENFORCEMENT AFFAIRS

    Ms. Madison. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the 
committee. Thank you, first of all, for the opportunity to 
testify as the nominee to be the Assistant Secretary of State 
for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. I am 
deeply honored by the President's nomination and at the 
prospect of serving my country again if I am confirmed.
    Since we started dating in high school, my husband Matthew, 
who is here today, has been my biggest supporter, my most 
honest critic, my most avid cheerleader. It means a lot to know 
that he is here.
    To my family, my brothers, Jay and Erik----
    Senator Flake. Raise your hand, Matthew. Okay, right behind 
you.
    Ms. Madison [continuing]. The long-suffering husband.
    Two of my brothers, Jay and Erik, and my parents, Lynn and 
Kathryn Madison. My mother happened to have flown in from 
Portugal with me last night, so she is here. I know that I 
would not be sitting here without their support and 
encouragement.
    The INL team, led by the Assistant Secretary, is a critical 
player in tackling some of the most challenging issues 
confronting our nation, including the ongoing opioid crisis and 
the efforts of criminal networks around the world to optimize 
their business models at the expense of democratic governance. 
INL programs help to secure our borders and cities by 
strengthening the ability of our partners to address threats 
before they reach our shores. INL also builds the capabilities 
and capacity of our international partners to defend their own 
citizens and systems of governance against transnational 
organized crime, corruption, terrorism, and in fact the points 
where those things link. Importantly, INL is helping 
governments to build and strengthen the rule of law that is so 
essential to economic opportunity, the kind of thing that the 
U.S. works for at home and abroad.
    Through the work of INL, the U.S. has proven over the 
decades that its influence is profound, that it is capable of 
driving progress in the global effort to confront crime and 
corruption. And through this work, the U.S. has embraced the 
idea that safeguarding our nation and its interests requires us 
to be engaged and creative and to actively cultivate the trust 
and confidence it takes to work effectively and secure the buy-
in of our international partners. This will continue to be an 
essential goal of INL, if I am confirmed.
    Through a career of more than 20 years, I have worked on 
governance, counternarcotics, and counterterrorism matters for 
the U.S. Senate, the House, the Departments of Homeland 
Security and State, at the Organization of American States, and 
on the National Security Council staff. Although focused 
heavily on the western hemisphere, I have also run programs in 
Asia, Europe, Africa, and the Middle East to build law 
enforcement and operational capacity of our partners and worked 
to gather partners to tackle global issues from piracy to 
illegal fishing to port security.
    INL has a significant budget, even in these times of 
financial pressures. As a former senior executive at State and 
the Department of Homeland Security, I understand the value of 
engaged management, effective interagency partnering, and 
securing buy-in from international partners who share our 
interests. While my Coast Guard program was on a much smaller 
scale, thinking critically about strategy, setting priorities, 
and making tough choices about how to best advance U.S. 
interests are no less essential to being the Assistant 
Secretary of State for INL.
    If confirmed, my top priorities have been set by the 
President: battling the opioid epidemic and redoubling efforts 
to counter the multi-headed hydra that is transnational 
organized crime. These are global efforts requiring our ongoing 
attention from Beijing to the Balkans to Liberia to the United 
Nations system and beyond. There will be important diplomacy 
and engagement to be done in the western hemisphere where the 
region-wide consensus we once had for counter-drug and crime 
efforts has ebbed. For our own security and prosperity, we need 
to help the rule of law recapture the momentum in this region 
and to help countries recover stolen or illicit assets and put 
them to good purpose. Likewise, the uptick in the production of 
illicit drugs in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Mexico all point to 
the need to redouble efforts to cement cooperation with them 
even as we work on the rest of the narcotic and crime continuum 
internationally and at home.
    In recent history, the INL Bureau has benefited from the 
extraordinary leadership of Ambassador Brownfield and the 
exceptional dedication and capabilities of the Foreign and 
Civil Service professionals who make up its ranks. If 
confirmed, it will be my honor to work alongside them. For the 
moment, for now, I am just grateful for their wisdom as I 
prepared for this hearing.
    In my experience, we are most successful when Congress and 
the executive branch share clarity of purpose and the long-term 
commitment to building institutions, forging partnerships, and 
constructing frameworks for international cooperation. If 
confirmed, I hope to work closely with this committee as we 
address the great challenges of our time.
    Again, thank you very much for this opportunity and I look 
forward to your questions.
    [Ms. Madison's prepared statement follows:]


                 Prepared Statement of Kirsten Madison

    Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you for the 
opportunity to testify as the nominee to be the Assistant Secretary of 
State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs. I am 
deeply honored by the President's nomination and at the prospect of 
serving my country again if confirmed.
    Since we started dating in high school, my husband Matthew--who is 
here today--has been my biggest supporter, and most honest critic and 
avid cheerleader. It means everything to know that he is with me every 
day.To my family, my brothers Jay and Erik and my parents, Lynn and 
Kathryn Madison: I know that I would not be sitting here without your 
support and encouragement.
    The INL team, led by the Assistant Secretary, is a critical player 
in tackling some of the most challenging issues confronting our nation, 
including the ongoing opioid crisis and the efforts of criminal 
networks around the world to optimize their business models at the 
expense of democratic governance. INL programs help to secure our 
borders and cities by strengthening the ability of our partners to 
address threats before they reach our shores. INL also builds the 
capabilities and capacity of international partners to defend their own 
citizens and systems of governance from the transnational crime (of all 
kinds), corruption, and terrorism that are inexorably linked. 
Importantly, INL is helping governments to build and strengthen the 
rule of law so essential to the economic opportunity the U.S. works to 
create at home and abroad.
    Through the work of INL, the U.S. has proven over the decades that 
its influence is profound, capable of driving progress in the global 
effort to confront crime and corruption. And, through this work, the 
U.S. has embraced the idea that safeguarding our nation and its 
interests requires us to be engaged and creative, and to actively 
cultivate the trust and confidence it takes to work effectively with 
and secure the buy-in of our international partners. This will be an 
essential goal of the INL team if I am confirmed.
    Through a career of more than 20 years, I have worked on 
governance, counter-narcotics, and counterterrorism matters for the 
U.S. Senate and House, the Departments of Homeland Security and State, 
the Organization of American States, and the National Security Council. 
Although focused heavily on the Western Hemisphere, I have also run 
programs in Asia, Europe, Africa, and the Middle East to build law 
enforcement and operational capacity of our partners and worked to 
gather partners to tackle global issues from piracy, to illegal 
fishing, and port security.
    INL has a significant budget, even in these times of financial 
pressures. As a former senior executive at State and Homeland Security, 
I understand the value of engaged management, effective inter-agency 
partnering, and securing buy-in from international partners who share 
our interests. While my Coast Guard program was on a smaller scale, 
thinking critically about strategy, setting priorities, and making 
tough choices about how best to advance U.S. interests are no less 
essential to being the Assistant Secretary for INL.
    If confirmed, my top priorities have been set by the President: 
battling the opioid epidemic and redoubling efforts to counter the 
multi-headed hydra that is transnational organized crime. These are 
global efforts, requiring our ongoing attention from Beijing, to the 
Balkans, to Liberia, to the United Nations system, and beyond. There 
will be important diplomacy and engagement to be done in the Western 
Hemisphere, where the region-wide consensus we once had for counterdrug 
and countercrime efforts has ebbed. For our own security and 
prosperity, we need to help the ``rule of law'' recapture the momentum 
in this region and to help countries recover stolen or illicit assets 
and put them to good purpose. Likewise, the uptick in production of 
illicit drugs in Afghanistan, Colombia, and Mexico all point to the 
need to redouble efforts to cement cooperation with them even as we 
work on the rest of the narcotic and crime continuum internationally 
and at home.
    In recent history, the INL bureau has benefited from the 
extraordinary leadership of Ambassador Brownfield and the exceptional 
dedication and capabilities of the Foreign and Civil Service 
professionals that make up its ranks. If confirmed, it will be an honor 
to work alongside them. For now, I am grateful for their wisdom as I 
prepared for the nomination process.
    In my experience, we are most successful when Congress and the 
Executive Branch share clarity of purpose and long-term commitment to 
building institutions, forging partnerships, and constructing 
frameworks for international cooperation.
    If confirmed, I hope to work closely with this committee as we 
address the challenges of our time. Again, thank you for this 
opportunity and I look forward to your questions.


    Senator Flake. Thank you, Ms. Madison.
    Mr. Hushek?

STATEMENT OF THOMAS J. HUSHEK, OF WISCONSIN, A CAREER MEMBER OF 
THE SENIOR FOREIGN SERVICE, CLASS OF MINISTER-COUNSELOR, TO BE 
  AMBASSADOR EXTRAORDINARY AND PLENIPOTENTIARY OF THE UNITED 
        STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH SUDAN

    Mr. Hushek. Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, and 
distinguished members of the committee, I am honored and 
humbled to appear before you today as the President's nominee 
to be the next United States Ambassador to the Republic of 
South Sudan.
    I would like to thank my family, friends, and colleagues 
whose encouragement and support have helped shape my career and 
made this moment possible.
    If confirmed, I look forward to working with this committee 
and other Members of Congress to advance our nation's 
priorities in South Sudan, leading our mission in Juba, and 
engage South Sudanese people and press the Government and other 
actors to find a meaningful and durable solution to the ongoing 
conflict and Africa's largest humanitarian crisis.
    Mr. Chairman, you and the members of this committee are 
well aware of the tragedy that is playing out in South Sudan. 
The independence of this nation in 2011 captured the world's 
attention and became a symbol for freedom, resilience, and the 
unbridled potential of Africa. The global community and the 
United States in particular offered unequivocal support to the 
South Sudanese people who for decades had known nothing but 
oppression, deprivation, and war. The American people provided 
vast amounts of technical advice, development assistance, and 
goodwill to support the new country's aspirations. But 
tragically, 2 years after independence, South Sudan's leaders 
in government and opposition plunged their country into an 
ever-worsening conflict and humanitarian crisis, betraying the 
dreams of the South Sudanese people for peace and development.
    Since the outbreak of hostilities in December 2013, South 
Sudanese civilians have experienced unspeakable cruelty at the 
hands of government forces and other armed actors, including 
widespread sexual violence used as a weapon of war. More than 4 
million South Sudanese have been displaced from their homes. 70 
percent of children are out of school, with roughly 19,000 of 
them forced to serve in armed groups. Without sustained 
humanitarian assistance and improved access, more than 7 
million people will face life-threatening hunger because of 
conflict this year. Even with this extreme level of need, 
parties to the conflict continue to impede delivery of 
humanitarian aid, and South Sudan is considered these most 
dangerous country in the world for humanitarians. The economy 
is in shambles, and South Sudan's modest oil wealth is being 
siphoned away through widespread corruption, fueling the 
conflict rather than the young nation's development.
    Despite the failure of South Sudan's leaders to act 
responsibly, the United States has not abandoned the South 
Sudanese people. As the single largest contributor of aid, we 
have provided more than $3 billion in emergency humanitarian 
assistance since fighting began in 2013. The American people 
should be proud of our leading role in the international effort 
to stave off famine and provide critical services such as 
water, nutrition, sanitation, and health care.
    The United States is also supporting regional efforts to 
negotiate a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Last December, 
the warring parties agreed to a cessation of hostilities as a 
first step in this process. Unfortunately, that agreement has 
been repeatedly violated by the signatories. We are working 
with African and international allies to press for its 
implementation and to apply consequences for violators. The 
United States will continue to take action against those who 
have fomented violence, obstructed the peace process, and 
enriched themselves through corruption while so many of South 
Sudan's people have been driven from their homes or are on the 
verge of famine.
    Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will press the leaders of all 
parties to the conflict in South Sudan and especially the 
Government to disavow violence and make the hard compromises 
necessary to achieve a peaceful resolution of their political 
differences. I will work tirelessly to urge respect for human 
rights and fundamental freedoms so that the people of South 
Sudan might once again aspire to a peaceful and prosperous 
future. I will work to ensure that America's humanitarian 
traditions are upheld and our generosity is not squandered. And 
finally, Mr. Chairman, I assure you that, if confirmed, I will 
keep as my top priority working to ensure the safety and 
security of U.S. citizens in South Sudan.
    Thank you again for this opportunity to appear before you 
today, and I look forward to answering questions you might 
have.
    [Mr. Hushek's prepared statement follows:]


                 Prepared Statement of Thomas J. Hushek

    Chairman Flake, Ranking Member Booker, and distinguished members of 
the committee, I am honored and humbled to appear before you today as 
the President's nominee to be the next United States Ambassador to the 
Republic of South Sudan. I would like to thank my family, friends, and 
colleagues whose encouragement and support have helped shape my career 
and made this moment possible. If confirmed, I look forward to working 
with this committee and other members of Congress to advance our 
nation's priorities in South Sudan, lead our mission in Juba, engage 
the South Sudanese people, and press the Government and other actors to 
find a meaningful and durable solution to the ongoing conflict and 
Africa's largest humanitarian crisis.
    Mr. Chairman, you and the members of this committee are well aware 
of the tragedy that is playing out in South Sudan. The independence of 
this nation in 2011 captured the world's attention and became a symbol 
for freedom, resilience, and the unbridled potential of Africa. The 
global community, and the United States in particular, offered 
unequivocal support to the South Sudanese people who, for decades, had 
known nothing but oppression, deprivation, and war. The American people 
provided vast amounts of technical advice, development assistance, and 
goodwill to support the new country's aspirations. But tragically, two 
years after independence, South Sudan's leaders--in the Government and 
opposition--plunged their country into an ever-worsening conflict and 
humanitarian crisis, betraying the dreams of the South Sudanese people 
for peace and development.
    Since the outbreak of hostilities in December 2013, South Sudanese 
civilians have experienced unspeakable cruelty at the hands of 
government forces and other armed actors, including widespread sexual 
violence used as a weapon of war. More than 4 million South Sudanese 
have been displaced from their homes. Seventy percent of children are 
out of school, with roughly 19,000 forced to serve in armed groups. 
Without sustained humanitarian assistance and improved access, more 
than seven million people will face life-threatening hunger because of 
the conflict this year. Even with this extreme level of need, parties 
to the conflict continue to impede delivery of humanitarian aid, and 
South Sudan is considered the most dangerous country in the world for 
humanitarians. The economy is in shambles, and South Sudan's modest oil 
wealth is being siphoned away through widespread corruption, fueling 
the conflict rather than the young nation's development.
    Despite the failure of South Sudan's leaders to act responsibly, 
the United States has not abandoned the South Sudanese people. As the 
single largest contributor of aid, we have provided more than $3 
billion in emergency humanitarian assistance since fighting began in 
2013. The American people should be proud of our leading role in the 
international effort to stave off famine and provide critical services, 
such as water, nutrition, sanitation, and health care.
    The United States also is supporting regional efforts to negotiate 
a peaceful resolution of the conflict. Last December, the warring 
parties agreed to a Cessation of Hostilities as a first step in this 
process; unfortunately, that agreement has been repeatedly violated by 
the signatories. We are working with African and international allies 
to press for its implementation and to apply consequences for 
violators. The United States will continue to take action against those 
who have fomented violence, obstructed the peace process, and enriched 
themselves through corruption, while so many of South Sudan's people 
have been driven from their homes and are on the verge of famine.
    Mr. Chairman, if confirmed, I will press the leaders of all the 
parties to the conflict in South Sudan--and especially the Government--
to disavow violence and make the hard compromises necessary to achieve 
a peaceful resolution of their political differences. I will work 
tirelessly to urge respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms so 
that the people of South Sudan might once again aspire to a peaceful 
and prosperous future. I will work to ensure that America's 
humanitarian traditions are upheld and our generosity is not 
squandered. Finally, Mr. Chairman, I assure you that, if confirmed, I 
will keep as my top priority working to ensure the safety and security 
of U.S. citizens in South Sudan.
    Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. I 
look forward to answering any questions that you might have.


    Senator Flake. Thank you both for your testimony.
    Let me start with Ms. Madison. When we were in my office a 
while ago, we talked about wildlife trafficking. Senator Booker 
and I just returned from a trip to Africa. It is an extremely 
important source of revenue for the countries in southern 
Africa and certainly a form of enjoyment for a lot of American 
tourists and others who go to see obviously large herds of 
elephants and the remaining rhinos.
    What is our administration's policy with regard to wildlife 
trafficking, and what will your office do with regard to 
implementation of that policy?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you for the question. In fact, 
I noticed this week there was an article about sales of 
endangered species parts on, I think it was, Facebook. It is a 
constantly evolving issue.
    Wildlife trafficking is another form of transnational 
organized crime. It, unfortunately, is a very lucrative one for 
criminals. There is high demand. There is high return on 
investment, and there is still, unfortunately, a relatively low 
risk of being caught.
    From an INL perspective, again this is transnational 
organized crime. So the bureau works in a variety of different 
ways. It works at the international multilateral level to make 
the U.N. Convention on Transnational Organized Crime real and 
to help countries make use of the tools in that to go to work 
on transnational organized crime.
    In addition, it works to build investigator capacity, law 
enforcement capacity, prosecutorial capacity in countries where 
this is an issue. And it very specifically has programs on 
wildlife trafficking. There are 20 different programs, for 
example, in Africa that are designed to help countries take 
this on.
    It is a big source of income. INTERPOL did a report not too 
long ago that said environmental crimes was between $100 
billion and $250 billion a year. So some segment of that is 
wildlife trafficking. Even if it is at the low end of that, 
that is an enormous boon to criminal organizations.
    So I think INL has a focus on this particularly in Africa 
because it is a particular challenge, but there is also work in 
Latin America and in Asia. So that is kind of the basic 
laydown, sir.
    Senator Flake. Thanks.
    When we met, you told me there is an endless desire for 
U.S. engagement in training in law enforcement issues, that the 
toughest decisions are deciding what our limits and priorities 
will be.
    Can you talk a little bit about that? How do we prioritize 
what I am sure is a lot of demand for our involvement there?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, yes, there is always an endless 
demand for our engagement, for our constructive engagement, for 
our support, for our tools--you know, law enforcement capacity, 
whichever piece of it you want to talk about. And I think that 
what you really have to do when you are confronted with global 
demand and also global challenges is figure out where you can 
most closely align with U.S. national security interests. 
Obviously, transnational organized crime and the opioid crisis 
have been prioritized by the President. But also, I think you 
have to look at the question of where you can have impact. In 
some circumstances, you cannot have impact because you do not 
have a willing partner or because the security circumstances on 
the ground do not allow you to.
    So I think it is about alignment with national security 
objectives. It is about being realistic about where you can 
have an impact, and also I think in thinking about these 
things, you have to also look at the question because most of 
the issues that INL deals with are transnational in some way. 
You have to look for where there are opportunities to work 
regionally. I think wildlife trafficking is a good example of 
where you have sort of a sweep of crime and where regional 
efforts can be powerful.
    Senator Flake. Thank you.
    Mr. Hushek, we have been without an Ambassador to South 
Sudan for almost a year now. It was the summer of 2017. How do 
we put an ambassador there now without lending legitimacy to 
the Government and their actions of late? What is the State 
Department prepared to do to tell Juba that what has been going 
on is certainly not acceptable?
    Mr. Hushek. Thank you.
    Yes, it has been since last summer since an ambassador was 
there. Of course, our embassy is remaining active. But as an 
Ambassador, if confirmed, one of the main things I will be 
committed to is delivering those tough messages to the highest 
level of the Government as possible.
    Another very important part of what I and the embassy will 
be working on is communicating and relating to the people of 
South Sudan, and that goes beyond just government officials. 
Right now, in order to put pressure on the Government of South 
Sudan and the other parties to the conflict, the State 
Department and the U.S. Government are putting on a series of 
escalating mechanisms to force the parties to take seriously 
the political talks that are going on to end the conflict.
    So last fall, shortly after the Ambassador left, we put in 
some sanctions against three high-level individuals and then 
another one in December, a business associate of the president.
    And in February, we instituted a national arms embargo 
preventing arms and ammunitions going from the U.S. there to 
verify an effective policy that we had in place already.
    And also this spring, we have worked through multilateral 
organizations to renew the mandates of the U.N. mission in 
South Sudan, as well as the U.N. Human Rights Commission for 
South Sudan, so those kind of multilateral mechanisms as well.
    All during that period, we have also been supporting these 
ongoing peace talks called the High Level Revitalisation Forum, 
coordinating among the donor nations and, most importantly, 
with the neighboring countries to South Sudan to put pressure 
on the Government and the other parties.
    Senator Flake. Thank you.
    Senator Booker?
    Senator Booker. I am going to defer to Senator Shaheen.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you very much, Chairman Booker.
    Thank you both for being willing to take on these very 
important roles at this difficult time.
    I am going to begin with you, Ms. Madison, because you 
talked about the role of the INL in the whole drug trafficking 
issue. And as you may be aware, New Hampshire is one of those 
States in the U.S. that is at the epicenter of the opioid and 
heroin epidemic that we are experiencing. We have the highest 
rate of fentanyl overdose deaths in the country.
    So I wonder if you can talk about what more INL can do to 
counter the flow of fentanyl in particular but other drugs, of 
course, and what more you think the Congress can do to help 
support your efforts.
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you very much for the question.
    I think if there is any one issue that was raised, as I did 
my consultative meetings on the Hill, whether at the staff 
level or the Senator level, it was this one because of the 
impact on so many communities and cities and families in this 
country.
    I think INL is working in a very concerted way on this 
already in the sense that it is engaged at the multilateral 
level, at the international narcotics control level, in the 
U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime to build the frameworks, to 
strengthen the frameworks that we have to control drugs, and 
also to make use of the tools that are in those agreements and 
in those organizations to actually get more drugs, opioids 
specifically, under international control. We control many 
things domestically and we need other countries to do it 
domestically, but that international control piece is really 
essential.
    I think INL has done some very effective work already to 
get more drugs under control and also to try to accelerate the 
pace of control because what the drug organizations do is they 
change the formula and then they have another drug. And you get 
in this endless cycle of trying to get ahead of what they are 
up to.
    So I think the international piece of it is important. I 
think it is going to remain important, and I think in addition 
to being a framework and way of working together, there are 
tools built into those international agreements that we can 
actually put to work to allow for real-time operational 
cooperation. You know, you have to kind of tackle every piece 
of the chain.
    I think the bilateral work that has been done with China so 
far by INL has actually been impressive. They do not have a 
domestic use problem in China, but they have moved to control 
more than 140 synthetic opioids, including carfentanil, which 
of course is an enormous problem. And they have also moved to 
provide a lot more advanced electronic data that allows us to 
sort of get a sense of what is moving in the mail because it is 
a principal delivery system.
    I think that one of the things that is left to be done is 
to encourage the Chinese to actually do more control of 
synthetic opioids as a class, again to get out ahead of what is 
going on with the changes in formulas. I think there is more 
work to be done on the mail front, not just for the Chinese, 
but not every country has the capability to share information. 
And I think as I understand it as an outsider looking in, INL 
is also looking at the question of what else can be done with 
the International Postal Union to tackle that piece of it.
    There is another piece that I think requires attention that 
is continuing to evolve, which is the criminal use of the 
Internet for the sales on the dark web and their convergence 
with cryptocurrencies which are, unfortunately, very agile and 
anonymous tools to move money. And that is a piece that, if I 
were confirmed, I want to really understand where we are on 
that and what else we can do to kind of get in front of it. I 
know there is plenty of work going on. INL is doing a lot of 
work on cyber crime and financial crimes. But again, this is an 
evolving area of this, and I think it should be of great 
concern to us.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    Ms. Madison. Sorry. I used a lot of your time, Senator.
    Senator Shaheen. INL operates the International Law 
Enforcement Academies. As we look at the challenges that are 
facing so many countries, whether it is South Sudan or 
countries in Eastern Europe, we are seeing in South America 
corruption is one of the biggest challenges. And obviously, 
having a law enforcement system and a judicial system that is 
able to address that corruption and helping to change what has 
been a culture in some of those countries is really important. 
I had a chance to visit the Law Enforcement Academy in Budapest 
last year and was very impressed with what I heard from the 
people who were students at the academy who were law 
enforcement in various countries, most of them in Eastern 
Europe. But can you just talk about the commitment of INL to 
continue the work there and how important it is?
    Ms. Madison. Thank you for the question, Senator. I will 
try to be very quick this time.
    Yes, the ILEAs are actually really important. I have only 
ever visited the one in El Salvador because I worked on the 
western hemisphere. First of all, it is considered to be very 
prestigious to go, which I think is good. It has some appeal.
    But I think part of what INL is doing with the ILEAs is 
helping to build into the police forces and into the academies 
the idea that you have to have professional ethics and respect 
for human rights. And they are also helping to build internal 
affairs organizations and other preventative structures into 
the police forces that they work with. So the ILEAs can be very 
powerful I think in helping to sort of build that in from the 
bottom up.
    Senator Shaheen. And the networks that the students who 
attend there develop is also very important, as we heard.
    I am out of time, but I do want to ask for your commitment 
to--one of the great things that INL does is to encourage the 
women being part of police forces and law enforcement around 
the world, and that has had some real success. I hope that you 
will remain committed to ensuring that that program not only 
continues but that it grows.
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you very much for the question.
    I do think INL does a good job of trying to build this 
sensibility and effort in from the ground up, and I will 
absolutely remain committed to the effort.
    Senator Shaheen. Thank you.
    Mr. Hushek, I leave you to Senator Young. [Laughter.]
    Senator Flake. And with that, Senator Young.
    Senator Young. Thank you, Chairman.
    Ms. Madison, you are nominated to serve as Assistant 
Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law 
Enforcement Affairs. You wrote in your prepared remarks that, 
if confirmed, you would be a critical player in tackling some 
of the most challenging issues confronting our nation, 
including the ongoing opioid crisis.
    Now, many people in my State of Indiana like so many other 
Americans have been afflicted by this opioid crisis. In fact, 
in the year 2016, which is the year for which we have most 
recent data, there were 785 drug overdose deaths involving 
opioids. If you lose a father, a mother, a sibling, a son, it 
can really impact the home, and that ripples throughout a 
community.
    If confirmed, I just want to make sure, in light of the 
increasing severity of this crisis, do you commit to me and to 
this committee as well that you will make battling the opioid 
epidemic one of your top priorities?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, the answer to your question is 
absolutely yes.
    Senator Young. Excellent. Thank you.
    As you know, fentanyl is a synthetic opioid. It is much 
more potent than heroin. We know that secretly produced 
fentanyl, as well as most of the associated illegal precursors 
and analogs, are primarily sourced through China, and they are 
smuggled into the U.S. through Mexico, Canada, and also through 
direct mail.
    Now, it is my understanding Mexico serves as a 
transshipment point, and there are labs in Mexico or there may 
be labs in Mexico that use precursor chemicals that are then 
smuggled over our southwestern border to produce fentanyl.
    Based on your experience and your preparation for this 
hearing, Ms. Madison, can you provide just a quick update on 
the transnational elements of the opioid crisis?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you for your question.
    This is really at the heart of INL's piece of this. Of 
course, there is a domestic piece in prevention and law 
enforcement and other elements of this, but INL's piece is this 
transnational effort to secure cooperation and work across 
borders.
    I think that the opioid trade, the illicit opioid trade, 
whether it is heroin from Mexico or synthetics from China, 
relies on various means to get here, as you noted, the mail. 
But I do think we are seeing this process of fentanyl being cut 
into other drugs and then delivered to the U.S. So there is 
very definitely a piece of this process that is about securing 
the cooperation with Mexico in particular because that is a 
pathway. And I do think there is a pretty good basis--there is 
actually an incredible basis of cooperation with Mexico on 
these issues.
    But, yes, the problem is even if you tackle the mail piece 
of it, what will happen is the traffickers will shift over and 
use whatever means that they can. And so that avenue through 
Mexico or any other country that they can get their product 
through will remain an important thing for us to work on. And 
if I am confirmed, of course that would be a priority.
    Senator Young. Are there specific things either now or in 
the near term that you think need to be done that are not being 
done that can help address the illicit flow of these precursors 
or of opioids into our country and therefore adversely impact 
the younger population?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, as I mentioned, I think that there is 
some undone work on the mail front. I think there is some 
undone work on the control front. I think we need to kind of 
have the broader framework in place. We need to use the control 
regimes. And then I think the ongoing effort of working with 
Mexico to improve their capabilities to control what moves in 
and out of their country, the intelligence sharing, and finding 
ways to expand that will continue to be important. It is a 
question of constant vigilance and those relationships and 
those working partnerships.
    Senator Young. Well, thank you. I am going to have my team 
follow up with you, with your indulgence, after this hearing 
just to gather your insights based on your professional 
experience to see if there are other countries or international 
organizations from whom we might learn best practices, whether 
it is on the law enforcement end of things or treatment or 
prevention, because we tend to think of the opioid crisis as a 
national crisis, and indeed it is that. But in preparation for 
this hearing, it was quite clear to me that this is also an 
international crisis, and there may be countries doing things 
more effectively than we are. So do you commit to working with 
my team on that?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, I would be delighted to have the 
conversation, if confirmed or before I am confirmed as part of 
this process. Absolutely.
    And it is in fact a global crisis. I think you can read in 
a newspaper in the UK or many other places in the world about 
the impact of illicit opioids on families and cities. We are 
not alone, and we have not necessarily cornered the market on 
good ideas.
    Senator Young. Lastly with the chairman's indulgence, I 
would just like to communicate to you I will be submitting a 
question for the record pertaining to your work on the issue of 
illegal fishing. This is something I have been learning more 
about recently. It has some really serious consequences and I 
think highly under-reported. And so I appreciate your 
assistance in answering those questions.
    Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Senator Flake. Thank you.
    Senator Booker?
    Senator Booker. Thank you very much.
    Mr. Hushek, how do you evaluate the role of the IGAD who 
has been trying for years to negotiate some kind of peace 
deals, which seem to be broken time and time again?
    Mr. Hushek. Well, the IGAD continues to be very important 
in the peace process. This is composed of the countries that 
are immediate neighbors to South Sudan. So a peace process to 
be enforced would require these countries to be intimately 
involved.
    The current ongoing high-level Revitalisation Forum----
    Senator Booker. They just were meeting in March. Right?
    Mr. Hushek. They met twice in December and then again in 
February and are going to be meeting again later this month for 
a third round.
    They still have yet to tackle the very serious security and 
governance issues that are on the table, and this has to do, in 
part, as I mentioned before, with the incentives of the parties 
to negotiate in good faith. For our part, we are putting extra 
pressure on--using pressure mechanisms to make sure that they 
sit at the table and negotiate. These are the sanctions and the 
other measures that we have taken.
    We have also continued to support some of the mechanisms 
that will ultimately be used for providing accountability for 
the serious human rights and other crimes that have taken 
place. And the IGAD will play a role in this as well.
    If you look at it as concentric circles, outside the IGAD 
countries, there are also the broader African Union and the 
United Nations, and we are working in all these fora to press 
these issues. But in fact, these immediate neighboring 
countries play the most important role in getting this peace 
process moving forward.
    Senator Booker. It seems like we have been doing a lot of 
the same things over and over again and not getting anywhere. 
Could you articulate to me a strategy born from the wisdom of 
not our failures but the failure to bring about peace here?
    Mr. Hushek. Yes. One of the newer ingredients in the 
process is putting on a campaign of increasing pressure on the 
parties. So it started out long ago with some UN-sponsored 
sanctions for field level commanders. Last fall, we took it up 
to the next level and we put on sanctions on some people that 
were at cabinet level positions in the Government or 
equivalents. And the idea is to continue to increase this 
pressure.
    We have also moved up in the area of arms embargo. We still 
are pursuing that, exploring the possibility----
    Senator Booker. Can you just hold on for a second? I am 
sorry to interrupt you.
    So according to my notes, we have got sanctions on about 10 
individuals in South Sudan, four of whom were just sanctioned 
last year. But how do you evaluate the impact of that tool and 
those sanctions?
    Mr. Hushek. Those sanctions with the other related items 
like the recent addition of petroleum entities on the 
Department of Commerce's entities list and the arms embargo 
that I mentioned--those things have gotten some attention in 
Juba and in the region I have to say. The intermediate step, 
though, is to get the neighboring countries to also put on the 
same kind of pressure on the parties that they are in most 
close touch with. So the Governments in Ethiopia, Uganda, 
Kenya, Sudan are very important to get into the process.
    Senator Booker. In the Bush administration, Deputy 
Secretary Bob Zoellick played an important role as a point 
person, you know, after Special Envoy John Danforth left the 
post vacant. And I am just wondering. We have seen from the 
Bush administration and Obama administration high-level 
diplomatic efforts. And I am just wondering do you think that 
higher-level diplomatic efforts or a deputy secretary or 
special envoy positions--do you think that that is something 
that we could be ramping up now in your evaluation?
    Mr. Hushek. Yes. I think we definitely need high-level 
attention. I as the Ambassador, if confirmed, will of course be 
able to deliver messages at the highest levels in Juba, but 
since this is really a problem that will require regional 
participation, it is important to have high-level attention 
from the administration.
    So far, in the past year, we have had Ambassador Haley, our 
Ambassador to the U.N., and Administrator Mark Green from USAID 
visit and deliver very tough messages to President Salva Kiir 
and others. And also there have been some members of this body 
that have also visited and helped us deliver strong messages. 
So we need to keep that high-level engagement very much active. 
Secretary Tillerson, when he was out there last month, also 
raised South Sudan in some of the regional stops that he made 
during his visit. But we definitely need to continue to pursue 
high-level attention to the problem.
    Senator Booker. Two of my esteemed colleagues have come, so 
I do not want to go over my time any more, but I do want to 
come back to this again.
    Senator Flake. Thank you.
    Senator Gardner?
    Senator Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    Thanks to both of you for your willingness to serve, and 
congratulations on the nominations.
    Just last week, a couple of weeks during the congressional 
work period, I had an opportunity to visit places across 
Colorado holding a number of roundtables on drug abuse, opioid 
addiction, and law enforcement roundtables where we talked 
about what is happening in Colorado and beyond.
    One of the most alarming and shocking discussions we had 
was a roundtable in Alamosa, Colorado, which is in the San Luis 
Valley in the southern part of Colorado where 90 percent of the 
inmates in the local jail are addicted to drugs, where we had a 
discussion with the local hospital about how they are trying to 
get nasal injections of Narcan to kids because it is easier for 
the kids to administer that to their parents when they 
overdose. This is pretty heavy stuff.
    You know, we talk about things like a New York Times 
report. Afghanistan continues to produce about 85 percent of 
the world's opium despite more than $8 billion the U.S. has 
spent fighting the problem. The United Nations Office on Drugs 
and Crime reports another 17. China is playing a key role in 
the surge of opium production in Afghanistan by generating new 
strains of genetically modified seed allowing poppies to be 
grown year-round. The seeds began appearing in 2015 and led to 
a massive 43 percent surge in production in 2016.
    Ms. Madison, do you agree with that report? What should we 
be doing to address China's influence in Afghanistan's drug 
trafficking? I mean, what is appearing in the San Luis Valley 
in Colorado obviously is not coming from something grown there, 
but it is coming from the outside. What should we be doing? Do 
you agree with it?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you for the question.
    Yes, the opioid crisis is a global problem, and even though 
the opioids that come out of Afghanistan do not tend to make it 
to the U.S., they make it as far as Canada. So I do not think 
we should be sanguine about the future path of those drugs, 
should the traffickers decide the market conditions are right 
for them to come here.
    I think that what we need to be doing is continuing to work 
on all of the elements of this problem. It is transnational 
organized crime. There are international frameworks that we can 
encourage countries to sign up to, use the frameworks and the 
organizations like the U.N. Office on Drugs and Crime to hold 
them accountable to that, to make use of those tools, to 
improve operational cooperation and frameworks in these 
individual governments.
    I think that the surge that we are seeing in production in 
a variety of places is of concern, of course. It is of concern 
in Mexico. It is a concern on the cocaine front in Colombia. 
But I think those international frameworks are the starting 
point because they allow us to advance the process of 
controlling these substances, which begins to help to sort of 
limit the range of motion that the traffickers have.
    And I think INL's work also--they work at a bilateral 
level. They are working in individual countries to build law 
enforcement capabilities, to build investigative capabilities, 
to help countries' financial intelligence units and other 
financially focused organizations tackle the money piece of it 
because the drugs do not move without the money and that is a 
really critical piece of this puzzle and the anti-money 
laundering efforts that INL works on. So I think there is a 
bilateral piece of it, and I think that all of those pieces 
have to be brought to bear if we want to tackle this.
    One of the things that I referred to in my opening 
statement that I think bears emphasis is when we show up in 
these countries and we do not just say cooperate with us, but 
we say, look, we need your help. It is in your interest to work 
on this. It is in our interest to work on this. And we show up 
and we bring tools, and we say, look, this is assistance that 
can help you investigate. It can help you prosecute. That is 
when we actually can be successful. It is actually the sort of 
secret power of INL. It has resources to come and bring tools 
to the table to actually help countries be our partners and 
help them cooperate with us. I think there is power in that.
    You know, there is no silver bullet and there is nothing 
quick. It is about building those enduring partnerships and 
building enduring capability and beginning to limit the range 
of motion for the narcotraffickers over time.
    Senator Gardner. Human Rights Watch estimates that the war 
on drugs in the Philippines led by President Duterte has cost 
12,000 lives. Obviously, they have a drug problem in the 
Philippines. Some of it is related to China as well. How do we 
work both to end and help the Philippines address this war on 
drugs but also make sure that we are addressing the human 
rights issues that accompany this war on drugs?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you for this question.
    The Philippines is a particularly challenging place. Really 
I think the U.S. Government has great cooperation with the 
Philippines on the maritime issues and some other things, but 
we have an obvious and completely justified concern with their 
approach to their war on drugs. It is essentially extrajudicial 
killings masquerading as justice. It means that the system is 
failing.
    I think INL has, as I understand it, reviewed their entire 
program in 2016, shifted away from working with the police, and 
is focused on working with the criminal justice institutions 
and development, domestic prevention programs because, as you 
noted, the source of the problem here is they have a domestic 
use problem. And built into those programs is a large human 
rights component because there needs to be. I think over time 
you can begin to create the infrastructure of the rule of law 
and criminal justice systems that are actually respectful of 
human rights and institutions that can appropriately do their 
job in a democratic context.
    Senator Gardner. Thank you both for your time and 
testimony.
    Mr. Chairman, thanks.
    Senator Flake. Thank you.
    Senator Kaine?
    Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    And congratulations to each of you for your nomination to 
these positions.
    Mr. Hushek, I want to ask you a question about protection 
of aid workers. South Sudan is reportedly the deadliest country 
in the world for aid workers. 95 have been killed since 2013. 
Most of them are local staff. And aid agencies report hundreds 
of what they call access incidents in the country in 2016, 70 
percent of them violent, and the number of incidents increased 
to 1,159 in 2017, which was the highest number of incidents 
yet.
    Some suggest that these international aid workers are 
increasingly alleged to be agents of regime change and that is 
why they get targeted.
    What pressure can the U.S. put on the Government of South 
Sudan to ensure that aid workers, especially local staff, are 
better protected?
    Mr. Hushek. Thank you.
    Yes, South Sudan is considered the most dangerous place in 
the world for humanitarian workers. Just this last several 
days, there were the first two deaths of humanitarian workers 
in 2018. So the numbers do keep going up.
    If confirmed, I will ensure that one of the main priorities 
of the embassy will continue to be coordination and advocacy on 
these issues of access for humanitarian workers and security 
for humanitarian workers. Our programs, mostly run by USAID, do 
build in a lot of good monitoring to look for diversions, 
obstructions to the process so we can tackle them early. We 
participate actively in all the coordinating mechanisms with 
the broader aid community in South Sudan and play strong 
leadership roles in a lot of these as well in Juba. And that 
coordinating mechanism is something that I think the U.S. 
embassy there is very uniquely positioned to do. It is one of 
the largest missions there, and we have the expertise in all 
these areas and, of course, the strong record as humanitarian 
donors.
    On the security front also, USAID and others imitate this 
process well, but we build into the programs with our 
implementing partners a good flow of information about security 
conditions and also an expectation that all the implementing 
partners have strong security plans as well. So these steps are 
important to try to address these problems, but it is one that 
will remain high on my agenda, if confirmed.
    Senator Kaine. Excellent. Thank you.
    Ms. Madison, I want to ask you about Colombia and cocaine. 
The U.S.-Colombian relationship has been very powerful. The 
Plan Colombia, now Peace Colombia--you know, we have shown that 
partnership across different administrations of different 
parties have enabled significant progress to occur. But there 
is a dramatic expansion of coca production in Colombia, and we 
are seeing in the U.S. cocaine kind of back on the uptick. I 
just came from a HELP hearing on opioids. We talked about 
opioids and fentanyl here. But we are seeing cocaine use in the 
United States start to increase again.
    What do you see that you might be able to do, if confirmed, 
to work with what has been a good U.S. partner, Colombia, to 
try to figure out a way to do more on the supply eradication 
side?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you for the question.
    I am, I guess, unfortunately, old enough to have been here 
when we were doing Plan Colombia on Capitol Hill, and I 
remember that in those days, we were talking about the 
potential of a failed state in Colombia. And now I think we 
have a very strong partner in that country in many ways and 
both deep and wide cooperation.
    Obviously, the surge in coca production, cocaine production 
in Colombia is of concern. And I think that it requires us to 
remain engaged on a variety of things whether it is their 
eradication targeting or the other sort of elements of their 
program.
    I think that there is a new administration coming in 
Colombia this summer. One of the things I actually think that 
we need to be doing is positioning ourselves so that we are 
engaged early and often with them on their larger strategy 
because I think what they are planning to do, in terms of 
eradication, and while they are having a great year in terms of 
interdiction and they have done a lot of manual eradication--
what they are planning to do now will not keep them ahead of 
the curve. So I think that we need to remain engaged with the 
Colombians. We need to continue to encourage them to sort of 
increase their eradication targets. And I think when you have a 
new administration inbound, it is a great opportunity to renew 
the conversation and seek their cooperation.
    The Colombians understand how important this issue is to 
them. I think they are balancing a lot of issues internally, of 
course, with the peace process and other things, but I think 
that it is a great partnership and we can build on it to tackle 
this piece of the challenge.
    Senator Kaine. Thank you very much.
    Thank you, Mr. Chair.
    Senator Flake. Thank you, Senator Kaine.
    And I thank all of you for participating. You had a good 
showing here and a lot of interest in the work that you are 
going to do.
    Senator Booker. Can I ask one other?
    Senator Flake. Go ahead. Yes, go ahead. Senator Booker will 
have a few more questions.
    Senator Booker. I just have a few more questions. I 
apologize.
    Senator Flake. No problem.
    Senator Booker. Because I am really concerned about the 
role of the neighbors you were talking about and some of their 
behavior, whether it is Kenya seeming to undermine our 
sanctions by allowing South Sudanese to get involved or in 
Uganda who we are funding in significant ways and supporting 
militarily, in fact, perhaps one of the most significant 
recipients of a lot of our resources in sub-Saharan Africa. But 
they seem to be supplying arms that are making this conflict 
worse.
    So I am wondering. As you say trying to pull our allies in, 
should we be taking a much stronger role, a much stronger 
stance against allies undermining our efforts?
    Mr. Hushek. Yes. So far the efforts that I spoke of on 
sanctions and the national-level arms embargo, these are 
national U.S. mechanisms. But a very important key would be to 
the extent that we can multilateralize these to do that.
    So on the arms embargo, of course we have been supporting a 
full arms embargo in the United Nations since 2016. We brought 
it to a vote but it did not pass in December 2016. And we are 
keeping our eye on whether the balance, the calculus has 
changed enough to take that back to the Security Council that 
would really make a stronger efforts on the arms flow.
    On the sanctions, also you are right that these are, again, 
sanctions that we have put in place--the recent ones at least--
to convince the countries in the region to take it as seriously 
as we do. A lot of the leaders in South Sudan, Government and 
opposition, have family members living, banking in neighboring 
countries.
    Senator Booker. Just real quick because according to my 
notes, the U.N. panel has already reported that Uganda supplied 
Kiir's regime with weapons. And we are giving weapons to--the 
DOD spent $130 million to train and equip in Uganda. And 
according to my notes, we have given a pattern of a lot of 
heavy equipment, including helicopters and ammunition. And 
there is concern that they have been transferred from Uganda to 
South Sudan. Is this not a serious undermining of our efforts 
in that area?
    Mr. Hushek. I do not know that U.S.-supplied weapons have 
been transferred from Uganda to South Sudan, but the flow, at 
least through Uganda into South Sudan, of ammunition even is 
something that has been reported. The idea of the arms embargo 
or stopping the ammunition and arms flows into the country is 
in order to reduce the suffering of the victims of the civil 
war. So wherever we can find places to put pressure on, we 
should be doing that.
    That is why one of the ideas of multilateralizing an arms 
embargo would be good, but right now, we do not have the votes 
in the Security Council to do that. We have gotten positive 
statements in the recent months on the margins of these peace 
talks where the neighboring countries and the AU are starting 
to recognize that there need to be consequences put in place 
for people that are undermining the peace process. But so far 
strong actions have not been taken based on those statements.
    Senator Booker. Just really quick, Ms. Madison.
    Thank you very much, Mr. Hushek.
    Just really quick. So obviously, we have three branches of 
government. We have the administration and Congress. We are in 
charge of the power of the purse. The President proposes a 
budget. Can your work withstand a 40 percent cut in resources, 
the critical work that you are doing if you are advising the 
people that actually have the power of the purse?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, thank you for your question.
    I think INL still has a substantial budget. I think any big 
cut requires you to just sort the priorities more aggressively. 
And since I am not on the inside, I suspect that what went on 
inside of INL was that they looked at programs, looked at 
anything that was less effective or less impactful, looked at 
how things aligned to the top priorities, and set about the 
business----
    Senator Booker. No. I appreciate that. Clearly there is a 
crisis in this country that is growing worse. Clearly those 
programs that are effective might demand more resources not 
less. I was a mayor of a city. I cut my government 25 percent. 
So I am a cutter and was able to raise efficiency. So I know 
how government can often do things backwards, to put it 
politely. But when you find things that are making a difference 
at a time that thousands and thousands of Americans are dying, 
should we not be doubling down our efforts and not constraining 
them?
    Ms. Madison. Senator, if confirmed, I would, of course, 
support the President's budget. But what I will say is that 
your job, when you are an Assistant Secretary, when you are in 
a senior leadership position--your job is to understand your 
programs and be the best possible advocate for them in the 
internal budget process. I have been inside of government 
agencies when the budgets were down, and that really is what it 
is about. It is about making the best case for the things that 
you can put on the table to serve the national security 
interests of the country. So by the time a budget is put out, 
that has all happened.
    So what I can say is if I am in this job, one of the first 
things that I will do is get to know these programs in the best 
possible way, get to understand their impact and effectiveness, 
and position myself to be the best advocate I can be for the 
work of this bureau and for the contribution it makes to the 
security of our country.
    Senator Booker. That was a nimble, dexterous, and good 
answer. Your husband behind you is beaming with pride as he saw 
how you successfully navigated my onslaught. [Laughter.]
    Senator Booker [continuing]. You will be a very good 
diplomat. [Laughter.]
    Senator Flake. Agreed.
    Thanks to both the witnesses today.
    The hearing record will remain open till the close of 
business, including for members to submit questions for the 
record. We ask the witnesses to respond promptly. So any 
responses will be made a part of the record.
    I appreciate your willingness to serve and the sacrifices 
made by your families and friends to have you serve. Thank you 
for being here.
    And we conclude this hearing.
    [Whereupon, at 11:05 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]



                              ----------                              



              Additional Material Submitted for the Record

     Responses to Additional Questions for the Record Submitted to
            Kirsten Dawn Madison by Senator Robert Menendez

    Question 1. The United States is suffering an opioid epidemic that 
has taken the lives of tens of thousands of American citizens and is 
increasingly fueled heroin and fentanyl that is trafficked into our 
country. If confirmed, how will you prioritize combatting illicit 
heroin and fentanyl trafficking?

    Answer. If confirmed, combating illicit heroin and fentanyl 
trafficking will be one of my top priorities as INL Assistant 
Secretary. I will prioritize State Department efforts to employ a 
coordinated approach to disrupt the sources and trafficking of heroin 
and illicit fentanyl coming to the United States. This would include 
regional and bilateral efforts to engage key partners like Mexico and 
China. With Mexico, I would seek to deepen the U.S. partnership with 
their government and improve their capacity to attack transnational 
criminal organizations. With China, I would support greater cooperation 
with them on efforts to prevent the illicit production and shipments of 
synthetic drugs like fentanyl. I would also deepen cooperation with key 
multilateral organizations to control the production and sale of deadly 
synthetic opioids, expand efforts to interdict these drugs in the 
international mail and express consignment courier systems, and take 
down illicit drug sales sites on the internet and Dark Web.

    Question 2. What is your assessment of the importance of U.S.-
Mexico cooperation to address illicit heroin and fentanyl trafficking 
and transnational organized crime?

    Answer. Mexico is an essential partner on counternarcotics and 
disrupting transnational organized crime. If confirmed, I will ensure 
the Department of State continues to work closely with Mexico to reduce 
the availability and trafficking of heroin, fentanyl, and other illicit 
drugs to the United States. With presidential elections in Mexico on 
the horizon, INL will have an important role to play in setting the 
tone for future cooperation on these issues as the new Mexican 
administration assumes office.
    To protect American lives, we must curb U.S. demand that fuels the 
illicit drug trade; disrupt networks that smuggle drugs, cash, and 
weapons across our shared border with Mexico; partner with Mexico to 
achieve meaningful criminal justice outcomes that deny transnational 
criminal organizations the ability to act with impunity and profit from 
their crimes; and fight the corruption that undermines our efforts.

    Question 3. What is your assessment of the importance of U.S.-China 
cooperation to address illicit fentanyl trafficking?

    Answer. China is a major source of illicit fentanyl and its 
precursor chemicals and therefore a critical partner in the global 
effort to address these threats. The rise in fentanyl-related deaths in 
the United States has created greater urgency for close cooperation. 
China domestically controlled 143 synthetic substances, including 
carfentanil and nine other fentanyl analogues, at our request. Five of 
those substances have been controlled since the President's November 
2017 meeting with President Xi.
    I understand it will likely take at least a calendar year for China 
to take the necessary steps to control fentanyl analogues as a class. 
One of my priorities, if confirmed, will be to work with Ambassador 
Branstad to press the Chinese to do more on this issue, including 
through chairing the U.S.-China Joint Liaison Group on Law Enforcement 
and Cybersecurity Cooperation.

    Question 4. At a time when the political relationship between the 
U.S. and Mexico is under increasing duress, how will you work to 
sustain and build the cooperation necessary to combat illicit 
trafficking and transnational organized crime?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure the Department of State 
continues to work with Mexico to sustain and advance our security 
cooperation. We will work to disrupt networks that smuggle drugs, cash, 
and weapons across our shared border; partner with Mexico to achieve 
meaningful criminal justice outcomes that deny traffickers the ability 
to act with impunity and profit from their crimes; and fight the 
corruption that undermines our efforts. Importantly, the work done 
under the Merida Initiative since 2007 has built a deep and substantive 
cooperative relationship with Mexico founded on what I believe is a 
mutual recognition that these issues must be tackled for the well-being 
of both countries and their citizens.

    Question 5. What additional steps will you take to expand U.S. 
efforts to combat heroin and fentanyl trafficking?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that INL effectively works with 
key source countries like Mexico and China to crack down on the 
production and trafficking of heroin and illicit fentanyl. I will 
engage these countries vigorously through existing platforms such as 
the Joint Liaison Group on Law Enforcement and Cybersecurity 
Cooperation (JLG/LECC) with China, and the North American Drug Dialogue 
with Mexico and Canada, as well as through multilateral fora to 
increase international cooperation.
    If confirmed, I will direct INL to support critical efforts to 
increase information sharing on the trafficking and use of opioids and 
real-time cooperation among law enforcement officials. This includes 
exploring the links among cryptocurrencies, the Dark Web, and 
traffickers, as well as interventions to address them. I will also work 
with my colleagues in the Bureau of International Organizations to seek 
enhanced collaboration with the Universal Postal Union to expand 
international capacities to detect and interdict fentanyl and other 
dangerous drugs trafficked by international mail.

    Question 6. How will your efforts be affected by the President's 
proposed 30 percent cut to the INL budget, including a 38 percent cut 
to INL funding for Mexico?

    Answer. While the overall budget has been reduced, I understand the 
Department's fiscal year 2019 budget request focuses resources for INL 
on core U.S. national security priorities, including efforts to combat 
the opioid epidemic. The request includes funding for programs to 
combat the flow of heroin and fentanyl to the United States. If 
confirmed, I will ensure the Department of State continues to work 
closely with Mexico, China, and other international partners to reduce 
the production and availability of heroin, fentanyl, and other illicit 
drugs and to dismantle transnational criminal organizations.

    Question 7. What do you see as the role of INL in countering malign 
Russian Government influence in Europe, including in Ukraine but also 
in the Western Balkans and Central Europe?

    Answer. INL programs play an important role in directly countering 
Russian interference in Ukraine, the Western Balkans, and in Central 
Europe. Crime and corruption create conditions, such as lack of 
confidence in government institutions, which Russia can exploit. INL's 
programs help strengthen the ability of law enforcement agencies and 
justice sector institutions to hold corrupt leaders accountable and to 
combat corruption and organized crime. INL programming also develop 
civil society organizations that are more capable of holding 
governments accountable, thus helping these countries to develop a 
robust culture of democratic values.

    Question 8. What specific programs/activities will you seek to 
support to this end?

    Answer. I believe the United States can and should play a role in 
enhancing our partners' resilience against Russia's efforts to 
undermine their democratic processes. If confirmed, I will support the 
continuation of INL programs in Europe and Eurasia, which build the 
capacity of partner nations' law enforcement and judicial sectors to 
fight against transnational organized crime, including through the 
development of core and advanced law enforcement competencies such as 
anti-money laundering and asset forfeiture. I will also support the 
continuation of INL's work to strengthen border security in countries 
such as Ukraine to protect their sovereign territorial integrity 
against direct Russian aggression. Globally, I will support cybercrime 
programs to help countries better defend themselves against Russian-
sponsored cyber criminals.

    Question 9. How will you support the objectives of these programs 
with diplomacy and engagement in the interagency policy process to 
develop effective strategies to counter Kremlin aggression?

    Answer. Russia has shown through its actions that it rejects the 
post-Cold War order. Its aggression in Ukraine, and earlier in Georgia, 
is the most obvious demonstration that Moscow is willing to undermine 
norms within the existing international system. Russia's efforts have 
extended beyond traditional military campaigns to encompass a suite of 
``hybrid'' tools that are used to gain influence.
    Russia's campaign is aggressive, coordinated, and involves a whole-
of-government approach. Among other tactics, Moscow exploits countries' 
weak judicial sectors, fomenting instability through corruption and 
organized crime, and supports domestic, often extremist, political 
parties.
    Russian efforts to undermine stability and democratic institutions 
are unacceptable and require a whole-of-government response. If 
confirmed, I will ensure INL works collaboratively with U.S. 
interagency partners and with our allies to deter and defend against 
these activities at home and abroad. I will support our combined 
diplomatic, foreign assistance, intelligence, and law enforcement lines 
of effort to roll back Russian influence.

    Question 10. The U.S. financial system faces challenges globally 
from financial crimes, money laundering and transnational organized 
crimes. What is your assessment of the importance of INL's work to 
combat international financial crimes and money laundering?

    Answer. I believe INL has a key role in combating financial crimes 
and money laundering globally by strengthening our foreign partners' 
ability to enforce laws consistent with international standards and 
good practices. This work involves ensuring that partner nations have 
institutions and personnel in place with the skills and tools to 
prevent, investigate, and prosecute financial crimes and money 
laundering. I have long believed that preventing and combating 
international financial crime and money laundering is vital to 
protecting U.S. markets and interests. If confirmed, I will support 
INL's continued efforts to exert diplomatic pressure and support 
partner nations to follow the money trail left by criminal actors, 
including their increasing use of cryptocurrencies for illicit means.

    Question 11. How will you work with inter-agency stakeholders to 
strengthen INL's cooperation programs with our international partners 
in order to expand efforts to combat financial crimes and money 
laundering?

    Answer. Preventing and combating international financial crime and 
money laundering is vital to protecting U.S. markets and security. If 
confirmed, I will work with my interagency counterparts on this 
critical whole-of-government effort. I understand that INL already 
partners with interagency stakeholders in the Department of Treasury, 
Department of Homeland Security, and Department of Justice to provide 
technical assistance to our international partners. In fact, while with 
the U.S. Coast Guard I saw firsthand how effectively INL taps into 
inter-agency capabilities to strengthen partnerships around the world. 
These bilateral programs provide regulators, financial intelligence 
units, law enforcement, prosecutors, and judges with the skills and 
tools necessary to counter financial crimes and bring the perpetrators 
of financial crimes, including transnational criminal organizations, to 
justice. INL also supports regional anti-money laundering efforts at 
its International Law Enforcement Academies, which rely on interagency 
expertise for leadership and instruction on these topics. If confirmed, 
I will support this assistance and its reliance on the deep expertise 
of INL's interagency partners.

    Question 12. If confirmed, how will you make anti-corruption 
programs a priority?

    Answer. Corruption facilitates transnational crime and undermines 
economic growth. If confirmed, I will prioritize anti-corruption 
programming in three areas: improving a country's ability to impose 
consequences for corruption by strengthening laws and building law 
enforcement capacity; strengthening prevention of corruption through 
advice and training on measures that build cultures of integrity and 
mitigates risk; and supporting civil society to build external pressure 
for reform and to provide oversight and accountability.

    Question 13. How will you work to strengthen INL anti-corruption 
programs?

    Answer. I understand that INL's anti-corruption efforts fall into 
three main areas: capacity building programs, visa sanctions, and 
multilateral policy. If confirmed, I will support continued engagement 
in all of these areas and strengthen INL's regional efforts to build 
foreign law enforcement capacity to manage complex, transnational 
issues like asset recovery and foreign bribery and to facilitate 
international legal cooperation. If confirmed, I will ensure that the 
Department's anti-corruption visa tools are actively used to further 
our anti-corruption foreign assistance objectives. Finally, I will 
encourage INL to leverage international treaties, such as the U.N. 
Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), to build political will for 
reform, identify gaps, and help target our work within each country.

    Question 14. INL has increasingly been willing to privately use 
visa denials and revocations as a tool to deter corruption; will you 
continue and expand these efforts?

    Answer. Yes, if confirmed, I will support continuing and expanding 
efforts to implement corruption-related visa denial and revocation 
authorities, including Presidential Proclamation 7750 and Section 
7031(c) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2018, as well as the 
corruption prong of Global Magnitsky. I view these authorities as 
valuable measures in preventing and combating public corruption, and as 
complementary to the range of other State Department tools. Continued 
enforcement of sanctions and visa denial tools helps impose 
consequences on corrupt foreign officials and deters others from 
committing corrupt acts.

    Question 15. Despite having a strong partnership with the Colombian 
Government in combatting drug trafficking, we have seen a worrisome 
growth of coca cultivation in Colombia since 2013. It is clear that 
developing a permanent counternarcotics strategy is complicated and 
requires a comprehensive approach that equally prioritizes eradication, 
destruction of cocaine laboratories, interdiction of drug trafficking 
shipments, the arrest of traffickers, efforts to combat financial 
crimes and money laundering, and robust programs to consolidate the 
rule of law and democratic governance, as well a sustained strategy to 
advance economic development and provide licit economic opportunities. 
Do you commit to working with our Colombian partners to advance a 
comprehensive strategy that combats all elements of the illicit 
narcotics trade?

    Answer. Colombia has been one of our most important partners in the 
fight against transnational organized crime, narco-trafficking and 
terrorism in the Americas, but I share your alarm regarding the steady 
and signficiant growth in Colombian coca cultivation and cocaine 
production. I understand that at the U.S.-Colombia High-Level Dialogue 
(HLD) on March 1, the United States and Colombia agreed to expand 
counternarcotics cooperation over the next five years, with the shared 
goal of reducing Colombia's estimated cocaine production and coca 
cultivation to 50 percent of current levels by 2023. If confirmed, I 
will prioritize work with Colombia to ensure continued progress in 
reducing coca cultivation and the production of cocaine as agreed to at 
the HLD, including through enhanced eradication, interdiction, 
alternative development, and operations to dismantle narcotrafficking 
organizations. Given the near-term presidential elections in Colombia, 
if confirmed, my goal will be to have robust and early engagement on 
these issues with the new administration there.

    Question 16. What do you plan to do to address some of the broader 
problems that are complicating our counternarcotic efforts in Colombia 
like a lack of state presence in vulnerable regions of Colombia and a 
dearth of viable economic opportunities?

    Answer. Making significant progress on expanding the presence of 
security and civilian agencies to vulnerable regions is essential to 
Colombia's ability to reverse growth in coca cultivation and cocaine 
production and to continuing to improve security and governance more 
broadly. U.S. assistance plays a key role in supporting this effort. 
The United States, through INL and others, currently works in Colombia 
with all levels of government, the armed forces, and the private sector 
to extend government presence, confront illegality, and encourage 
licit, sustainable development. If confirmed, I will continue to work 
with the Colombian Government to support the expansion of capable 
government services, security, and economic opportunities throughout 
the country.

    Question 17. Do you commit to working in partnership with USAID to 
expanding and strengthening alternative development programs in 
Colombia?

    Answer. Yes. If confirmed, I commit to working in close partnership 
with USAID to ensure alternative development efforts are closely linked 
with supply reduction efforts to sustainably reduce illicit cultivation 
and production in rural areas. Developing licit livelihoods is a 
critical part of a whole-of-government approach to combating coca 
cultivation and cocaine production in Colombia.

    Question 18. Do you commit to work with the U.S. Departments of the 
Treasury and Justice to prioritize combating financial crimes as part 
of our engagement with Colombia, including increasing money laundering 
prosecutions and asset forfeiture cases?

    Answer. If confirmed, I will work with the U.S. Departments of the 
Treasury and Justice to prioritize efforts to combat financial crimes. 
I commit to sustaining and advancing the State Department's ongoing 
efforts to train and mentor Colombian judicial officials and money 
laundering investigators to expand their institutional capacity to 
combat money laundering, increase asset forfeiture proceedings, build 
networks with international counterparts, and successfully prosecute 
illicit finance cases.

    Question 19. How do you plan to work with our partners in Colombia 
to more aggressively target financial crimes?

    Answer. Colombia is an essential partner in the fight against 
financial crimes, which fuel narcotrafficking and other forms of 
illicit activity in the Americas. If confirmed, I will continue the 
Department's efforts to build Colombia's capacity to combat money 
laundering and other financial crimes, pursue forfeiture, and 
effectively manage seized assets in order to target criminal networks 
and crucial business facilitators, with the goal of disrupting and 
dismantling their organizations. I will also encourage continued 
collaboration between the Department of the Treasury, the Department of 
Justice, and the U.S. interagency to target the financial crimes of 
Colombia-based criminal organizations.

    Question 20. The Department of State's 2017 International Narcotics 
Control Strategy Report on Money Laundering and Financial Crimes 
identifies 19 Caribbean countries on the ``Major Money Laundering'' 
list. As highlighted by the report, these countries act as transit hubs 
for illicit drugs, arms, and money. It is clear that these countries 
lack the institutional capacity to combat drug trafficking and 
associated crimes like money laundering. How will you help build law 
enforcement capacity throughout the Caribbean to reduce drug 
trafficking and money laundering?

    Answer. I understand that reducing drug trafficking and money 
laundering throughout the Caribbean are key goals of INL programs under 
the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI), which builds law 
enforcement and counternarcotics capacity and promotes criminal justice 
sector reform throughout the Caribbean. If confirmed, I look forward to 
continuing the work of CBSI counternarcotics programs to build partner 
countries' ability to detect and disrupt transnational organized crime, 
including money laundering and arms and narcotics trafficking. If 
confirmed, I will also continue to support INL's CBSI financial crimes 
and money laundering programs, which build partner countries' capacity 
to prevent and disrupt financial crimes through training and advising 
on the implementation of regulations to address money laundering, and 
through the provision of equipment and training for financial crimes 
investigators.

    Question 21. Haiti is one of the largest single-country INL 
programs in the Western Hemisphere, and it also struggles with 
extremely high-level of corruption. How do you ensure our foreign 
assistance is appropriately spent to advance U.S. interests?

    Answer. I support all efforts to ensure U.S. foreign assistance is 
appropriately spent in any country in which INL works, and if 
confirmed, I look forward to learning more about INL's assistance in 
Haiti to build the capacity of the Haitian National Police (HNP).
    I understand that INL's programming in Haiti is implemented and 
overseen directly by INL personnel at Embassy Port-au-Prince and that 
no INL funds are provided directly to the Government of Haiti. INL 
ensures proper monitoring and oversight of these programs through 
field-based contracting personnel, regular reporting from its 
implementers, and ongoing monitoring by INL. If confirmed, I will 
ensure INL continues to maintain strong oversight of this and all its 
other programs.

    Question 22. Haiti is one of the largest single-country INL 
programs in the Western Hemisphere, and it also struggles with 
extremely high-level of corruption. How do our programs address the 
systemic corruption problem in Haiti?

    Answer. If confirmed, I look forward to being fully briefed on 
INL's efforts to address corruption and accountability in Haiti, which 
is a core focus of INL's work with the Haitian National Police (HNP). 
INL helped stand up the HNP Office of the Inspector General (IG), which 
vetted hundreds of officer files, recommended the dismissal of hundreds 
of personnel for misconduct, established a public complaint hotline, 
and instituted a one-year probationary period for new HNP officers. 
INL-funded subject matter experts work in the office of the HNP 
Director General and IG office to support accountability and 
transparency within the HNP administration. INL also supports the 
U.N.'s Mission for Justice Support in Haiti (MINUJUSTH) with six U.S. 
advisors working in the U.N. Police mission (UNPOLs), focusing on rule 
of law, human rights, and capacity building for the HNP.

    Question 23. The Obama administration designated more than 10 
senior Venezuelan officials under Kingpin sanctions and the Trump 
administration designated the current Vice President of Venezuela under 
Kingpin sanctions. Given INL's role in international narcotics issues, 
will you work through the inter-agency process to ensure that the U.S. 
Government utilizes Kingpin sanctions thoroughly and effectively in 
Venezuela?

    Answer. The Kingpin Act is an effective sanctions tool against 
foreign narcotics traffickers and their organizations operating 
worldwide. If confirmed, I will prioritize the State Department's 
participation in the interagency process, led by the Department of the 
Treasury, to implement the Kingpin Act, including, as appropriate, in 
Venezuela.

    Question 24. Independent analysts have contended that successive 
administrations' funding for democracy and governance programs for 
Africa has not been sufficiently robust. INL plays an important role in 
strengthening anti-corruption, transparency, and rule of law; and yet, 
the administration's FY 2019 request for funds to support INL 
activities represent a 37 percent decrease from FY 2017. How effective 
can we be with such limited funding?

    Answer. The administration's FY 2019 budget request supports the 
President's commitments to make the U.S. Government more efficient by 
streamlining efforts to ensure the effectiveness of U.S. taxpayer 
dollars. I support the administration's budget request for INL, which 
includes programming for anti