Text: S.Hrg. 115-607 — Nomination Hearings of The 115th Congress-Second Session
-
PDF
(PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.)
[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 pro 