    [Senate Hearing 106-340, Part 2]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                               S. Hrg. 106-340 Pt. 2 deg.

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

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

                                    HEARINGS

                                    before a

                              SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE

                COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE

                           ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                       on

                         H.R. 2606, 3196, 3422/S. 1234

    AN ACT MAKING APPROPRIATIONS FOR FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING,
    AND RELATED PROGRAMS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING SEPTEMBER 30, 2000, AND
                               FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                   __________

                             Part 2 (Pages 1-113)

                      Agency for International Development
                             Department of Justice
                              Department of State
                           Department of the Treasury
                           Nondepartmental Witnesses
                    Department of Health and Human Services
                       Executive Office of the President
                    Overseas Private Investment Corporation
                               Export-Import Bank
                      U.S. Trade and Development Program

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations

     Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
                                     senate

                      U.S. Government Printing Office
    54-215 cc                  WASHINGTON : 2000
    _______________________________________________________________________
                For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
    Superintendent of Documents, Congressional Sales Office, Washington, DC
                                     20402
                               ISBN 0-16-060169-X

                          COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

                         TED STEVENS, Alaska, Chairman
    THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi            ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
    ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania          DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
    PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico         ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
    CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri        PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
    SLADE GORTON, Washington             FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
    MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky            TOM HARKIN, Iowa
    CONRAD BURNS, Montana                BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
    RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama           HARRY REID, Nevada
    JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire            HERB KOHL, Wisconsin
    ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah              PATTY MURRAY, Washington
    BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado    BYRON DORGAN, North Dakota
    LARRY CRAIG, Idaho                   DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California
    KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas          RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois
    JON KYL, Arizona
                       Steven J. Cortese, Staff Director
                     Lisa Sutherland, Deputy Staff Director
                   James H. English, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

       Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related
                                    Programs

                      MITCH McCONNELL, Kentucky, Chairman
    ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania          PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont
    JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire            DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
    RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama           FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
    ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah              TOM HARKIN, Iowa
    BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado    BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
    CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri        PATTY MURRAY, Washington
    TED STEVENS, Alaska                  ROBERT C. BYRD, West Virginia
      (Ex officio)                         (Ex officio)

                               Professional Staff

                                Robin Cleveland
                               Jennifer Chartrand
                             Tim Rieser (Minority)
                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------

                             Tuesday, March 9, 1999

                                                                       Page

    Department of State: Office of South Asian Affairs...............     1
    Nondepartmental witnesses........................................    31

                            Thursday, March 25, 1999

    Department of Justice............................................    51
    Department of State..............................................    51
    Nondepartmental witnesses........................................    79

                            Thursday, April 29, 1999

    Agency for International Development.............................   101

                            Wednesday, May 19, 1999

    Department of the Treasury: Office of the Secretary..............   149

                             Thursday, May 20, 1999

    Department of State: Office of the Secretary.....................   181
    Nondepartmental witnesses........................................   221

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                  ----------

                             TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 1999

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 2:13 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mitch McConnell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators McConnell, Bennett, Campbell, and Leahy.

                              DEPARTMENT OF STATE

                         Office of South Asian Affairs

    STATEMENTS OF:
            HON. KARL F. INDERFURTH, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR SOUTH ASIAN
                AFFAIRS
            HON. JULIA TAFT, ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POPULATION, REFUGEES,
                AND MIGRATION

                 opening statement of senator mitch mc connell

        Senator McConnell. Today's hearing will come to order.
        This is the first in a series of what I would characterize
    as some of the world's more, if not most, intractable problems.
    Over the next few months, I intend for the subcommittee to hold
    hearings on the linkages between U.S. assistance programs and
    our policies toward Afghanistan, North Korea, Iraq, the
    Palestinians, Russia, Indonesia, and Brazil. In each country we
    either indirectly or directly provide some type of aid. The
    funding ranges from support for programs for refugees, such as
    the border efforts along Afghanistan, to development and
    multilateral bank programs in Indonesia, Brazil, and Russia.
        While it is easy to provide anecdotal evidence that U.S.
    aid relieves human suffering and reduces poverty, at a time of
    rapidly diminishing levels of foreign aid resources, the
    unfortunate reality that Senator Leahy and I oppose, but must
    live with, is the whole question of whether our aid is serving
    our interests, where and when it matters most. Just a few of
    the kinds of questions I hope to examine over the coming months
    include:
        Has our expenditure of over $75 million for oil for North
    Korea reduced the threat of military conflict or the menace of
    their nuclear program?
        Is the congressional initiative to fund the opposition
    efforts to liberate Iraq achieving any results?
        Has our support of the IMF and World Bank programs promoted
    a stable, free market democracy or has it fed corruption in
    Russia?
        But today the questions will focus on Afghanistan.
        Several explosive issues fuse together in Afghanistan:
    narcotics trafficking, terrorism, regional military tensions,
    ethnic hostilities, refugee pressures, and internal civil and
    human rights abuses. Central to the solution of each of these
    problems and the promotion of our interests is the
    establishment of a viable, stable representative government,
    something that Afghan people have not enjoyed for decades.
    While there is a school of thought that argues the Taliban has
    delivered peaceful relief from years of Soviet occupation and
    mujahedin factional fighting, conditions are neither prosperous
    nor improved for most Afghanis today.
        Kandahar is a long, long distance from Kentucky, and no
    doubt many will ask why we should bother with a hearing, aid,
    or any measure of policy interest. The answer is simple:
        Afghanistan is the second largest producer of opium for
    heroin which makes its way onto U.S. streets; 220 people,
    including 12 Americans, died in savage bomb blasts that the
    administration blames on the Osama bin Laden organization,
    afforded honorary guest protection by the Taliban.
        Continued armed clashes between Iran's military and the
    Taliban risk a wider war, drawing in Pakistan, Russia, and
    Uzbekistan.
        Pakistan has provided safe haven to over 800,000 refugees,
    straining Islamabad's limited economic resources and political
    stability, facts which ripple through the nuclear dynamic with
    India.
        And finally, central to today's hearings, we all have
    mothers. Many have wives and sisters, and in their names in our
    common interests, we must address the Taliban's harsh,
    systematic denial to girls and women of health care, education,
    employment, and the most basic of rights.
        The status and treatment of women by the Taliban is not
    simply a matter of our cultural insensitivities as some would
    argue.
        In fact, lives are at stake. Women are beaten for appearing
    in public without a male relative or failing to wear the
    suffocating veils of the burqua. I was stunned to read that
    wearing white socks with the burqua risks a public beating
    because they are viewed as inappropriate and sexually
    provocative.
        And it is not just lives at stake. An entire generation of
    children is at risk. Until 1996, 70 percent of Afghanistan's
    teachers were women. Most are now banned from the profession
    and public schools remain closed, depriving all school age
    children of an education, girls and boys alike.
        Afghanistan is being dragged back into the dark ages, a
    time when women were chattel, literacy was a luxury, and
    sorcery substituted for sound medicine and health care.
    Children died of colds and measles then as they do now in
    Kabul. Far too many women died in childbirth, victims of
    ignorance, as they do now in Kandahar.
        The Taliban's war against the remnants of the mujahedin,
    combined with international isolation, compound the economic
    suffering. Yet, as depressing as conditions are, I do not think
    the situation is hopeless. In fact, I think there is a unique
    convergence of international interests which could compel
    strong action to produce a settlement of the internal conflict
    and an agenda to protect the rights and interests of all
    Afghans.
        Ironically after fighting a proxy war for a decade, the
    United States and Russia now share an interest in containing
    the influence of the Taliban's virulent form of Islamic
    fundamentalism. The Russians have obvious concerns about the
    Taliban's capacity to destabilize Central Asian states on their
    border. Russian support for the mujahedin, our former clients
    and the Taliban's only opposition, may also stem from an
    interest in limiting the development of alternative and
    competitive pipelines through Afghanistan.
        I understand we have engaged in a United Nations effort
    designed to produce a settlement which involves six key
    regional nations plus the United States and Russia. Given our
    interests, I hope this process can be energized and bring about
    a final solution.
        I also hope to hear today views on the wisdom of expanding
    our support for both border and cross-border initiatives which
    serve the interests of women and children.

                               prepared statement

        Afghanistan fuses multiple threats to American interests.
    It is precisely the type challenge I think we are likely to
    face as we turn the corner on this century. How we learn to
    deal with this lethal mix of religion, drugs, terrorism,
    repression, and crime today may very well define our security,
    if not our survival in the future.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Senator Mitch McConnell
        Today's hearing is the first in a series on what I would
    characterize as some of the world's more--if not most--intractable
    problems. Over the next few months, I intend for the Subcommittee to
    hold hearings on the linkages between U.S. assistance programs and our
    policies toward Afghanistan, North Korea, Iraq, the Palestinians,
    Russia, Indonesia, and Brazil. In each country we either indirectly or
    directly provide some type of aid. The funding ranges from support for
    programs for refugees, such as the border efforts along Afghanistan, to
    development and multilateral bank programs in Indonesia, Brazil and
    Russia.
        While it is easy to provide anecdotal evidence that U.S. aid
    relieves human suffering and reduces poverty, at a time of rapidly
    diminishing levels of foreign aid resources--the fortunate reality that
    Senator Leahy and I oppose but must live with--the issue we must
    address is whether our aid is serving our interests where and when it
    matters most. Just a few of the type of questions I hope to examine
    over the coming months include:
        Has our expenditure of over $75 million for oil for North Korea
    reduced the threat of a military conflict or the menace of their
    nuclear program?
        Is the Congressional initiative to fund the opposition efforts to
    liberate Iraq achieving any results?
        Has our support of the IMF and World Bank programs promoted a
    stable, free market democracy or fed corruption in Russia?
        Today, the questions focus on Afghanistan.
        Several explosive issues fuse together in Afghanistan--narcotics
    trafficking, terrorism, regional military tensions, refugee pressures,
    and internal civil and human rights abuses. Central to the solution of
    each of these problems and the promotion of our interests is the
    establishment of a viable, stable representative government, something
    the Afghan people have not enjoyed for decades. While there is a school
    of thought that argues the Taliban has delivered peaceful relief from
    years of Soviet occupation and mujahedin factional fighting, conditions
    are neither prosperous nor improved for most Afghanis today.
        Kandahar is a long, long way from Kentucky, and, no doubt many will
    ask why we should bother with a hearing, aid or any measure of policy
    interest. The answer is simple:
      --Afghanistan is the second largest producer of opium for heroin
            which makes its way onto our streets;
      --220 people, including 12 Americans, died in savage bomb blasts that
            the Administration blames on the Osama bin Laden organization
            afforded ``honorary guest'' protection by the Taliban;
      --Continued armed clashes between Iran's military and the Taliban
            risk a wider war drawing in Pakistan, Russia, and Uzbekistan;
      --Pakistan continues to provide safe haven to over 800,000 refugees
            straining Islamabad's limited economic resources and political
            stability--facts which ripple through the India relationship;
            and, finally,
      --Central to today's hearing, we all have mothers, many have wives
            and sisters, and in their names, in our common interests, we
            must address the Taliban's harsh, systematic denial to girls
            and women of health care, education, employment and the most
            basic of rights.
        The status and treatment of women by the Taliban is not simply a
    matter of our cultural insensitivity, as some would argue.
        Lives are at stake--women are beaten for appearing in public
    without a male relative or failing to wear the suffocating veils of the
    burqua. I was stunned to read that wearing white socks with the burqua
    risks a public beating because they are viewed as inappropriate and
    sexually provocative.
        And, it is not just lives at stake--an entire generation of
    children is at risk. Until 1996, 70 percent of Afghanistan's teachers
    were women. Most are now banned from the profession and public schools
    remain closed depriving all school age children of an education--girls
    and boys alike.
        Afghanistan is being dragged back into the dark ages--a time when
    women were chattel, literacy was a luxury, and sorcery substituted for
    sound medicine and health care. Children died of colds and measles
    then, as they do now, in Kabul. Far too many women died in childbirth,
    victims of ignorance--as they do now in Kandahar.
        The Taliban's war against the remnants of the mujahedin and
    international isolation, no doubt compound this economic suffering.
    Yet, as depressing as conditions are, I do not think the situation is
    hopeless. In fact, I think there is a unique convergence of
    international interests which could compel strong action to produce a
    settlement of the internal conflict and an agenda to protect the rights
    and interests of all Afghan citizens.
        Ironically, after fighting a proxy war for a decade, the U.S. and
    Russia now share an interest in containing the influence of the
    Taliban's virulent form of Islamic fundamentalism. The Russians have
    obvious concerns about the Taliban's capacity to destabilize Central
    Asian states on their border. Russian support for the mujahedin, our
    former clients and the Taliban's only opposition, may also stem from an
    interest in limiting the development of alternative and competitive
    pipelines through Afghanistan.
        I understand we have been engaged in a United Nations effort
    designed to produce a settlement which involves six key regional
    nations, plus the U.S. and Russia. Given our clear interests, I hope
    this process can be energized and bring about a final solution.
        I also hope to hear today, views on the wisdom of expanding our
    support for both border and cross border initiatives which serve the
    interests of women and children.
        Afghanistan fuses multiple threats to American interests--it is
    precisely the type of challenge I think we are likely to face as we
    turn the corner on this century. How we learn to deal with this lethal
    mix of religion, drugs, terrorism, repression and crime today, may very
    well define our security, if not our survival in the future.

                   opening statement of senator patrick leahy

        Senator McConnell. I would like now to turn to my
    colleague, the ranking member of the subcommittee, Senator
    Leahy, for his opening statement and then we will proceed with
    our witnesses.
        Senator Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to commend
    you for having this hearing.
        It is hard to describe in words what we have heard about
    this part of the world. We call it tragic, horrifying,
    outrageous, sad. No words are enough. We do know it has
    received too little attention for too long.
        The witnesses we have here are as knowledgeable as any we
    could have come before us, and I want to thank them for keeping
    us informed. Some of the information we have received has been
    from people who have risked their own safety to document the
    plight of the Afghan people.
        Ambassador Inderfurth is one of the finest professional
    diplomats I have ever had the pleasure to know. I can think of
    no one more qualified to represent our interests in
    Afghanistan.
        It was not very long ago that U.S. policy toward
    Afghanistan was the subject of considerable tension in the
    Congress and the press. It also soaked up huge amounts of
    American aid to the mujahedin and the millions of refugees in
    Pakistan.
        But, you know, besides the fact that they were anti-Soviet,
    we did not have much understanding of the people we were
    supporting. The Russians were their enemies. That made them our
    friends. And when the Russians left, we abandoned the Afghan
    people to the chaos and brutality of a country that turned on
    itself.
        Assistant Secretary Taft, who is extraordinarily
    knowledgeable in this area, knows what happened then.
        The Taliban, notorious for their flagrant violations of
    human rights and their especially brutal repression of women
    and girls, now occupy some 85 percent of the country. And
    Afghan refugees, some 2.4 million of them, remain the largest
    refugee population receiving U.N. assistance. I believe I am
    right in that number, am I not, Ms. Taft?
        Ms. Taft. Yes.
        Senator Leahy. As the chairman has said, the horrendous
    injustices being perpetrated against Afghan women, all in the
    name of Islam, is reminiscent of the dark ages. Physicians for
    Human Rights and others have documented the drastic decline in
    women's health and education. It is a travesty that should be
    condemned by the entire world. There should be no question that
    the United States will never recognize a regime that
    systematically subjects half its population to such barbarous
    mistreatment.
        Even though the Soviet army is gone, the fields and
    hillsides and roads, even some of the urban areas, are death
    traps. Some 7 million land mines litter the country, tens of
    thousands of amputees, mostly civilians, who have virtually no
    access to rehabilitation. I show a photograph periodically on
    the Senate floor of an Afghan boy missing both legs. That tells
    the story better than words of why the use of land mines should
    be a war crime.
        Besides the humanitarian crisis, the Taliban have shown no
    regard for the security concerns of their neighbors or the rest
    of the international community. Again, as the chairman pointed
    out, Osama bin Laden is an example of that.
        If that is not enough, Afghanistan and Burma share the
    dubious distinction of being the world's largest producers of
    opium poppy. What heroin has to do with Islamic fundamentalism
    is one of the mysteries that apparently only the Taliban can
    answer.
        I recognize the restraints they put on our humanitarian
    efforts. It would be easy to walk away. But we share a lot of
    the responsibility for what has happened in Afghanistan and we
    should not walk away.
        So, I hope, Ambassador Inderfurth, you will give us an idea
    of how much popular support the Taliban has, and whether they
    face any serious internal threat. Is there any hope for a
    sustained political dialog that could lead to a broad-based
    government?
        Do they care about world opinion? Two of our allies, Saudi
    Arabia and Pakistan, support them. Are we encouraging them to
    cut that aid off?
        Is there more we could do for women and the children there?

                               prepared statement

        I want to know whether will we will say publicly that the
    U.S. Government will not support normal relations with the
    Taliban or a seat at the U.N. until they stop supporting
    terrorism and uphold internationally recognized human rights?
        Mr. Chairman, I do want to hear the witnesses. I thank you
    again for holding this hearing.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator Leahy.
        [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy
        Mr. Chairman, I want to commend you for holding this hearing on
    Afghanistan. It is hard to find words to adequately describe what has
    happened there--tragic, horrifying, outrageous.
        Whichever you choose, it has received far too little attention for
    far too long. These witnesses are as knowledgeable as any, and I want
    to thank them for keeping us informed--at times risking their own
    safety to document the plight of the Afghan people.
        Ambassador Inderfurth is one of the finest professional diplomats I
    have ever had the pleasure to know. I can think of no one more
    qualified to represent our interests in Afghanistan.
        It was not very long ago that U.S. policy towards Afghanistan was a
    subject of considerable attention in the Congress and the press. It
    also soaked up huge amounts of American aid, to the mujahideen and the
    millions of refugees in Pakistan.
        But besides the fact that they were anti-Soviet, we had little
    understanding of the people we were supporting. The Russians were their
    enemies, and that made them our friends. And when the Russians left, we
    abandoned the Afghan people to the chaos and brutality of a country
    that turned on itself.
        The Taliban, notorious for their flagrant violations of human
    rights and their especially brutal repression of women and girls, now
    occupy some 85 percent of the country. Afghan refugees--2.4 million of
    them, remain the largest refugee population receiving U.N. assistance.
        The horrendous injustices being perpetrated against Afghan women,
    all in the name of Islam, is reminiscent of the Dark Ages. Physicians
    for Human Rights and others have documented the drastic decline in
    women's health and education. It is a travesty that should be condemned
    by the entire world. There should be no question that the United States
    will never recognize a regime that systematically subjects half of its
    population to such barbarous mistreatment.
        The Soviet army is gone but the fields and hillsides and roads,
    even urban areas, are death traps. There are some 7 million landmines
    littering the country and tens of thousands of amputees--mostly
    civilians, who have virtually no access to rehabilitation. This
    photograph of an Afghan boy, missing both legs, tells the story. It
    says, better than words, why the use of landmines should be a war
    crime.
        Besides the humanitarian crisis, the Taliban have shown no regard
    for the security concerns of their neighbors or the rest of the
    international community. They have given safe haven to Osama bin Laden,
    whose support for international terrorism is well known. Although the
    press reported last week that he and the Taliban had a falling out,
    there is no indication that they will respond to our repeated requests
    to expel him so he can be brought to justice.
        If that were not enough, Afghanistan and Burma share the dubious
    distinction of being the world's largest producers of opium poppy. What
    heroin has to do with Islamic fundamentalism is one of those mysteries
    that only the Taliban can answer.
        I recognize the constraints that the Taliban have put on our
    humanitarian efforts and those of the international relief agencies. It
    would be easy to do nothing but lament what has happened. But the
    United States shares responsibility for the chaos and suffering that
    has engulfed Afghanistan, and we should do what we can to help the
    Afghan people. We need to know where we can go from here.
        I hope Ambassador Inderfurth will give us an idea of how much
    popular support the Taliban has, and whether at this point they face
    any serious internal threat. Is there any hope for a sustained
    political dialogue that could lead to a broad-based government, or some
    other weakening of the Taliban's control?
        Do the Taliban care about world opinion? Two U.S. allies--Saudi
    Arabia and Pakistan, support the Taliban. What are we doing to
    encourage them to cut off their support? Is there nothing more that
    they can do to pressure the Taliban to change their most objectionable
    policies?
        Isn't there more we can do to help alleviate the plight of Afghan
    women and children? I hope our witnesses can give us some concrete
    advice on ways we could help.
        Have we said publicly that the U.S. Government will not support
    normal relations with the Taliban or a seat at the U.N., until they
    stop supporting terrorism and uphold internationally recognized human
    rights?
        These are a few of my questions. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that this
    hearing will point to steps this subcommittee can take to help the
    people of Afghanistan.

                 prepared statement of senator dianne feinstein

        Senator Leahy. Mr. Chairman, I would also ask that a
    statement by Senator Feinstein be put in the record at this
    point.
        Senator McConnell. Yes; without objection, we will put
    Senator Feinstein's statement in the record.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Senator Dianne Feinstein
        Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling this important hearing, and for
    allowing me to make a statement on the situation in Afghanistan, about
    which I have been very concerned for some time now.
        Just about one year ago I held a public meeting with
    representatives from the administration and leading non-governmental
    organizations to discuss one aspect of this situation--the Taliban's
    treatment of women and girls--a situation which I think we would all
    agree is deplorable, and one which I find to be particularly troubling.
        The information reported at that meeting was devastating:
      --Every day the women of Afghanistan are excluded from the
            international community's prevailing vision of human rights,
            and continue to lack basic legal rights, access to education,
            and access to economic opportunity.
      --There are more than 50,000 war widows in Kabul alone, many
            dependent on international humanitarian assistance for their
            very survival.
      --It is estimated that close to 500,000 to 800,000 war widows have
            been forced out of their jobs and have no opportunity to earn
            money for food, clothing, or shelter for either themselves or
            their children.
      --In Kabul's stark ruins hordes of children--as many as 12,000
            according to one estimate--paw each day through the shattered
            bricks and masonry in search of scrap metal that can be sold.
            And their mothers, many who previously worked in professional
            jobs, have been reduced to begging in order to feed their
            families.
      --According to Theresa Loar, the State Department's Senior
            Coordinator for Women's Issues, in the 1970s and 1980s a
            growing number of Afghan women worked outside the home: There
            were female lawyers, judges, doctors, and teachers. This trend
            was reversed in 1992 and now, under the Taliban, ``women and
            girls became, and remain today, virtually invisible.''
      --The ban on women in the workplace has also compounded the already
            precarious food situation. With the war having killed more than
            9 million head of cattle and sheep and destroyed much of
            Afghanistan's croplands, irrigation systems, and roads, the
            average Afghan has a caloric intake equal to less than a pound
            of bread a day.
      --Education is a major concern, with edicts which prevent girls from
            attending school and receiving an education. A small, low-
            profile, ``home school'' movement has had some fitful success,
            but these home schools are no substitute for access to a real
            education.
      --Many Non-Governmental Organizations have been doing work which is
            nothing short of heroic to provide medical and humanitarian
            assistance under the most adverse of circumstances. But they
            are faced with numerous constraints, from laws and practices
            which prevent the distribution of assistance or services
            directly to the women in need to physical danger which has, on
            numerous occasions, prevented them from working in Afghanistan.
        The women of Afghanistan, who have seen their families destroyed by
    war, are now having their economic life and their fundamental human
    rights stripped away.
        And, as witnessed by a ground breaking report by Physicians for
    Human Rights, the situation in Afghanistan has not improved at all in
    the past year. The report found, that:
      --A woman died of appendicitis after being turned away from two
            hospitals;
      --Women with diabetes are being denied insulin at clinics simply
            because they are women and, under Taliban edict, male doctors
            cannot treat them; and,
      --Women are dying in childbirth because male doctors are prohibited
            from performing deliveries, and female doctors are prohibited
            from working.
        As the State Department's 1998 Human Rights report states: ``The
    treatment of women and girls continued to deteriorate. There was
    widespread discrimination against women and girls, especially in areas
    under Taliban control. The Taliban imposed strict dress codes and
    prohibited women from working outside the home except in limited
    circumstances in the health care field. Girls generally were prohibited
    from attending school, particularly in Kabul and other urban areas.''
        This hearing gives the Committee an opportunity to learn what the
    Administration has done over this past year to implement the ``Afghan
    Women's Initiative'' which I called for in a resolution adopted by the
    Senate last year. That resolution called on the United States to play a
    larger role in leading international efforts to provide assistance to
    Afghan women in Afghanistan and in refugee camps, with an emphasis on
    capacity-building, training programs, legal assistance, support for
    microenterprise projects, and refugee reintegration and protection.
        This hearing can also probe the Administration's thoughts and plans
    for the general scope and direction of U.S. policy towards Afghanistan.
    Looking beyond the question of the Taliban's treatment of women, the
    situation in Afghanistan is one of concern for the United States on so
    many levels, and for so many reasons.
        The conditions of near-anarchy that have resulted from the civil
    war have created in Afghanistan an environment well-suited for the
    training of terrorists and the production and shipment of drugs. It is
    no coincidence that Osama Bin Laden had chosen Afghanistan as a base of
    operations, or that the past few years have seen Afghanistan rise to
    become the producer of one-third of the world's opium and heroin.
        Lastly, the ongoing crisis in Afghanistan has created a strategic
    imbalance in the region, threatening stability in Russia, the Gulf, the
    newly-emerging states of Central Asia, and South Asia itself.
    Afghanistan, long smoldering with its internal civil war, is a regional
    tinderbox which threatens to ignite at any moment.
        The only long-term solution to the plight of the Afghan people is
    to help bring an end to the conflict that has created the Taliban, and
    to begin the long process of rebuilding a stable and prosperous
    Afghanistan. The sort of long-term economic redevelopment that will be
    necessary to repair Afghanistan's battered infrastructure will not be
    possible unless both men and women are able to take up gainful
    employment and have equal access to educational opportunities.

                   summary statement of hon. karl inderfurth

        Senator McConnell. Our first panel will include Assistant
    Secretary Inderfurth who will provide an assessment of the
    political and security situation, followed by Assistant
    Secretary Taft who will report on refugee matters and how our
    humanitarian assistance may be serving our interests in the
    region.
        I would like for you both, if you have formal statements,
    to put them in the record, and please summarize them for our
    benefit. Then we will be glad to ask whatever questions we may
    have. Who would like to lead off? Secretary Inderfurth.
        Mr. Inderfurth. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Senator
    Leahy, members of the committee, along with my colleague,
    Assistant Secretary Taft, I would like to thank you for this
    opportunity to testify.
        I should add that I fully agree that Afghanistan falls into
    the category that you mentioned as one of the world's most
    intractable problems and, I might add, tragic. I hope that this
    hearing will make it clear why we in the United States should
    care and indeed why our interests are engaged.
        Mr. Chairman, I do have a longer statement which I would
    like to ask be submitted for the record, and I will try now to
    have a briefer presentation.
        Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, 10 years ago last
    month, I was an eyewitness to history. I stood at the bridge
    over the Amu Darya River in Uzbekistan and watched the last
    Soviet troops depart Afghanistan. After an estimated 2 million
    dead with their country in ruins, the valiant Afghan people
    were victorious over a superpower. I hoped this meant the end
    of 10 years of conflict and that peace at last was returning to
    Afghanistan.
        Unfortunately, this was not to be the case. The fighting
    continues today and it shows no signs of abating. The Taliban
    occupy 85 percent of the country but do not exercise effective
    political control, particularly in the north. Elements of the
    Northern Alliance continue to resist and have actually improved
    their position in recent months. We believe there is no
    military solution to this conflict. Yet, the Taliban has
    demonstrated no willingness to work for a political settlement,
    largely because they believe they can win militarily. We and
    others in the international community are working hard to
    change that view.
        Mr. Chairman, Afghanistan is geographically remote from us,
    but the effects of 20 years of conflict are not. Key U.S.
    interests are endangered. Anyone familiar with the events of
    last August and the destruction of U.S. embassies in Nairobi
    and Dar es Salaam knows the effect the Afghan conflict has had
    upon us.
        Afghanistan has become a breeding ground for international
    terrorism. In the fight against the Soviets, the Afghan
    resistance did not resort to international terrorism, but today
    Osama bin Laden and others have taken advantage of the war and
    its dislocations to use Afghan soil for training, basing, and
    safe haven. Terrorists with links to Afghanistan, both veterans
    of the fighting and those who have received training or shelter
    there, have committed terrorist acts in the region, including
    Kashmir, and beyond in Europe, Africa, and even in the United
    States.
        We have urged all of the Afghan factions to stop sheltering
    terrorists and their training facilities and to expel
    terrorists from parts of the country under their control. We
    have stressed to the Taliban and those with influence over them
    the need to expel Osama bin Laden to a location where he can be
    brought to justice. We have told them that he is plotting acts
    of terrorism against us and that because the Taliban have
    provided him safe haven, we will hold them responsible for his
    actions.
        Despite hollow protestations that Osama bin Laden is
    missing, there is no evidence he has left Afghanistan. Our
    experts and other informed observers believe he remains in
    Taliban-controlled territory. The Taliban are playing a risky
    and unwise game in attempting to convince us otherwise.
        Mr. Chairman, narcotics production and trafficking is
    another byproduct of the continued conflict, as you referred to
    in your statement. Afghanistan is now the world's second
    largest producer of opium and a major center for producing
    opiates. Narcotics produced in Afghanistan supply 3 million
    addicts in Pakistan and tens of thousands in Europe.
    Increasingly, heroin from Afghan-grown poppies is found in the
    United States. Almost all the opium produced in Afghanistan
    comes from Taliban areas, but virtually every faction has been
    involved at every level with and benefited financially from
    relationships with drug producers and traffickers. Nobody has
    clean hands on this.
        We and others have called on the Taliban and other factions
    to destroy opium crops and processing capability and urged
    cooperation with the U.N. Drug Control Program. Despite these
    calls, opium production increased 7 percent last year.
        Mr. Chairman, let me now turn to the human rights situation
    in Afghanistan. It is abysmal. Our most recent human rights
    report documents violations by all sides. Taliban forces killed
    thousands in Mazar-i-Sharif last year, reportedly based in part
    on ethnicity. This is part of a cycle arising from the massacre
    of Taliban prisoners by northern forces in 1997.
        The Taliban attempts to impose an extreme interpretation of
    Islam practiced nowhere else in the world on all individuals,
    men and women, under their control. We have received reports of
    religious persecution at the hands of the Taliban in
    prohibiting Shia prayer practices and converting Shia mosques
    to Sunni. They have also banned many traditional elements of
    Afghan culture, including music and kite flying. But few
    practices have aroused more worldwide condemnation than Taliban
    treatment of women and girls.
        Women and girls historically have been at a tremendous
    disadvantage in Afghan society. Only a small but growing number
    of Afghan women, almost entirely in urban areas, worked outside
    the home in nontraditional roles as lawyers, judges, doctors,
    and government officials. The status of women and girls in
    Afghanistan deteriorated rapidly with the resumption of
    fighting between the resistance factions in 1992. The trend
    significantly intensified with the Taliban takeover of Kabul in
    1996 and the imposition of harsh social strictures. We have
    received recent reports that Taliban sympathizers in Pakistan,
    both Pakistani and Afghan, have attempted to apply similar
    restrictions both upon female inhabitants of refugee camps and
    upon Pakistani women too.
        When the Taliban took control of Kabul, they immediately
    forbade women to work outside the home, but gradually allowed
    exceptions for some female doctors and nurses. In urban areas,
    women are often barred from going outside the home unless
    accompanied by a male relative. The impact of Taliban
    restrictions on women is most acutely felt in cities such as
    Herat and Kabul, where there are numbers of educated and
    professional women who previously enjoyed far greater latitude.
    War widows--an estimated 30,000 are in Kabul alone--have been
    especially hard hit. Many of them are the sole providers for
    their families and have been reduced to begging to feed their
    children. There are credible reports that some women, now
    forcibly housebound, have attempted suicide by swallowing
    household cleaner rather than continuing to live under these
    conditions of isolation.
        Mr. Chairman, we have heard much about the burqa, and you
    spoke about that in your opening statement as well. Let me
    state what I know for the record. Others will expand on this I
    am sure during today's testimony. Women are enjoined from
    appearing in public, particularly in cities, unless wearing a
    traditional long robe called a burqa covering them from head to
    toe. Women have been beaten by the Taliban religious police on
    the street for failure to completely cover themselves in a
    burqa. Although some Afghan women wore the burqa before the
    Taliban took control, it was not an enforced dress code. Today
    it is.
        Mr. Chairman, the Taliban has also restricted education for
    girls, particularly in Kabul. Kabul's private home-based
    schools, which had quietly continued to operate, were ordered
    closed last year, though we understand some were allowed to
    reopen since. Although the Taliban claims that it is not
    against female education and has requested resources for
    Afghanistan's minimum educational infrastructure, these claims
    ring hollow. The militia has taken little real action to
    provide for female education.
        Women's and girls' access to medical services and hospitals
    has been drastically reduced. Although they reportedly are
    allowed to receive emergency care in all Kabul hospitals and
    non-emergency care in a few, women have died because male
    doctors were not allowed to treat them. The lack of ready
    access to medical facilities that do exist is further impacted
    by shortages of medicine and equipment. We commend Physicians
    for Human Rights for bringing this horrible situation to the
    attention of the world in its survey and report of women's
    health and human rights under the Taliban in Kabul.
        Mr. Chairman, the United States condemns Taliban policies
    publicly. Secretary of State Albright, during her visit to the
    Nasir Bagh refugee camps in Pakistan, described the Taliban's
    treatment of women as despicable.
        At the Human Rights Day celebration last December, the
    First Lady recognized two Afghan women in the audience for
    their invaluable work on behalf of women and girls and also
    said--and I quote--``We cannot allow these terrible crimes
    against women and girls--and, truly, against all humanity--to
    continue with impunity. We must all make it unmistakably clear
    this terrible suffering inflicted on the women and girls of
    Afghanistan is not cultural, it is criminal. And we must do
    everything we can in our power to stop it.''
        The President has pledged continued assistance to the women
    suffering under the Taliban regime.
        In international fora, we also speak out. We drafted the
    country resolutions on Afghanistan for this year and last
    year's annual meeting of the U.N. Commission on the Status of
    Women. Along with other U.S. officials, I have personally
    raised this issue in meetings with senior Taliban and Pakistani
    officials.
        I note the campaign instituted by the Feminist Majority and
    other human rights and women's organizations designed to raise
    our consciousness and to help Afghan women and girls. The State
    Department looks forward to working with them in this endeavor.
        My colleague, Assistant Secretary Taft, will inform you in
    this hearing regarding what we are doing on the ground in
    Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran to help all Afghans, but
    specifically Afghan women and girls, despite difficulty caused
    by the continuing conflict, security problems, and pressure
    from the Afghan factions, including the Taliban. The United
    States, as the largest individual contributor to Afghan relief,
    has a record that I believe we can all be proud of.
        Mr. Chairman, my written testimony goes into a fairly
    lengthy section on regional stability and the search for peace.
    Let me mention that that effort is ongoing, that currently the
    U.N. Secretary-General's Special Envoy, Ambassador Lakhdar
    Brahimi, is in the region, and that he is pursuing the so-
    called Six plus Two process that you mentioned in your opening
    statement. We also see some contacts taking place between the
    parties themselves, including the Taliban and some of the
    forces represented by Commander Masood. A meeting is scheduled
    to take place in Ashgabat on March 10th.
        Finally, as I think you know, later today, snow willing, I
    am prepared to depart for Moscow where I am to have
    consultations with the Russians on Afghanistan, and they
    continue to be very much involved and concerned about the
    events there.
        Rather than going into these issues at this time, let me
    simply restate for the record U.S. policy with respect to the
    ongoing conflict in Afghanistan and then be prepared to answer
    questions, including those posed by Senator Leahy in his
    remarks.
        Mr. Chairman, the United States supports no individual
    Afghan faction, but maintains contacts with all to further
    progress toward a peaceful settlement. We recognize none of the
    contending factions as the Government of Afghanistan and have
    no plans to do so. We would be prepared to recognize a
    Government of Afghanistan that was broad-based, multi-ethnic,
    and representative and respected international norms of
    behavior on issues of concern to the world community, including
    terrorism, narcotics, and human rights, particularly the rights
    of women and girls and minorities.

                               prepared statement

        Thus, we continue to be actively engaged on several fronts
    in the U.N., in Washington, in the region, and elsewhere. Our
    efforts, unfortunately, have not yet met with success. The
    fighting continues, the Afghan people suffer, the effects of
    the conflict spill over into neighboring lands and beyond. But
    as I have said before, without our direct involvement, this
    conflict will likely only continue to fester, causing even
    greater damage to our own interests and to those of the Afghan
    people.
        Thank you very much.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Hon. Karl F. Inderfurth
                      afghanistan today: the u.s. response
        Ten years ago last month, I was an eyewitness to history. I stood
    at the bridge over the Amu Darya River in Uzbekistan and watched the
    last Soviet troops depart Afghanistan. After an estimated 2 million
    dead, with their country in ruins, the valiant Afghan people were
    victorious over a superpower. I hoped this meant the end of 10 years of
    conflict and that peace at last was returning to Afghanistan.
        Unfortunately this was not to be the case. The fighting continues
    today. Worse, Afghans are fighting Afghans in an increasingly ethnic
    war unprecedented in Afghan history. Thus internecine conflict
    continues to the detriment of the Afghan people, the region, and the
    world.
        War shows no signs of abating. The Taliban occupy 85 percent of the
    country but do not exercise effective control, particularly in the
    North. Elements of the Northern Alliance continue to resist and have
    actually improved their position in recent months. We believe there is
    no military solution to this conflict, yet the Taliban has demonstrated
    no willingness to work for a political settlement, largely because they
    still believe they can win militarily. We and others in the
    international community are working to change this view.
    Terrorism
        Afghanistan is geographically remote from us, but the effects of 20
    years of conflict are not. Key U.S. interests are endangered. Anyone
    familiar with the events of last August and the destruction of U.S.
    Embassies in Nairobi and Dar Es Salaam knows the effect the Afghan
    conflict has had upon us.
        Afghanistan has become a breeding ground for international
    terrorism. In the fight against the Soviets, the Afghan resistance did
    not resort to international terrorism, but today Osama bin Laden and
    others have taken advantage of the war and its dislocations to use
    Afghan soil for training, basing, and safehaven. Terrorists with links
    to Afghanistan, both veterans of the fighting and those who have
    received training or shelter there, have committed terrorist acts in
    the region, including Kashmir, and beyond--in Europe, Africa, and even
    in the United States.
        We have urged all of the Afghan factions to stop sheltering
    terrorists and their training facilities and to expel terrorists from
    parts of the country under their control. We have stressed to the
    Taliban--and those with influence over them--the need to expel Osama
    bin Laden to a location where he can be brought to justice. We have
    told them he is still plotting acts of terrorism against us and that
    because the Taliban have provided him safehaven, we will hold them
    responsible for his actions.
        Despite hollow protestations that Osama bin Laden is ``missing,''
    there is no evidence he has left Afghanistan. Our experts and other
    informed observers believe he remains in Taliban-controlled territory.
    The Taliban are playing a risky and unwise game in attempting to
    convince us otherwise.
    Narcotics
        Narcotics production and trafficking is another byproduct of the
    continued conflict. Afghanistan is now the world's second largest
    producer of opium and a major center for processing opiates. Narcotics
    produced in Afghanistan supply three million addicts in Pakistan and
    tens of thousands in Europe. Increasingly, heroin from Afghan-grown
    poppies is found in the U.S. Almost all the opium produced in
    Afghanistan comes from Taliban areas, but virtually every faction has
    been involved at every level with and benefited financially from
    relationships with drug producers and traffickers. Nobody has clean
    hands on this.
        We and others have called on the Taliban and other factions to
    destroy opium crops and processing capability and urged cooperation
    with the U.N. Drug Control Program. Despite these calls, opium
    production increased 7 percent last year.
    Human rights
        The human rights situation is abysmal. Our most recent human rights
    report documents violations by all sides. Taliban forces killed
    thousands in Mazar-i-Sharif last year, reportedly based in part on
    ethnicity. This is part of a cycle arising from the massacre of Taliban
    prisoners by northern forces in 1997.
        The Taliban attempts to impose an extreme interpretation of Islam
    practiced no where else in the world on all individuals--men and
    women--under their control. We have received reports of religious
    persecution at the hands of the Taliban in prohibiting Shia prayer
    practices and converting Shia mosques to Sunni. They also have banned
    many traditional elements of Afghan culture, including music and kite-
    flying. But few practices have aroused more worldwide condemnation than
    Taliban treatment of women and girls.
    Taliban treatment of women and girls
        Women and girls historically have been at a tremendous disadvantage
    in Afghan society. Only a small but growing number of Afghan women,
    almost entirely in urban areas, worked outside the home in
    nontraditional roles, as lawyers, judges, doctors and government
    officials. The status of women and girls in Afghanistan deteriorated
    rapidly with the resumption of fighting between the resistance factions
    in 1992. The trend significantly intensified with the Taliban takeover
    of Kabul in 1996 and the imposition of harsh social strictures. We have
    received recent reports that Taliban sympathizers in Pakistan, both
    Pakistani and Afghan, have attempted to apply similar restrictions both
    upon female inhabitants of refugee camps and upon Pakistani women too.
        When the Taliban took control of Kabul they immediately forbade
    women to work outside the home, but gradually allowed exceptions for
    some female doctors and nurses. In urban areas, women are often barred
    from going outside the home unless accompanied by a male relative. The
    impact of Taliban restrictions on women is most acutely felt in cities
    such as Herat and Kabul, where there are numbers of educated and
    professional women who previously enjoyed far greater latitude. War
    widows--an estimated 30,000 are in Kabul alone--have been especially
    hard hit. Many of them are the sole providers for their families and
    have been reduced to begging to feed their children. There are credible
    reports that some women, now forcibly housebound, have attempted
    suicide by swallowing household cleaner, rather than continuing to live
    under these conditions of isolation.
        We have heard much about the ``burqa.'' Let me state what I know
    for the record. Women are enjoined from appearing in public,
    particularly in cities, unless wearing a traditional long robe called
    the ``burqa'' covering them from head to toe. A small mesh covered
    opening about five inches square provides the only means to see. Women
    have been beaten by the Taliban ``religious police'' on the street for
    failure to completely cover themselves in a burqa. Although many Afghan
    women wore the burqa before the Taliban took control, it was not an
    enforced dress code. Many women in Kabul typically appeared in public
    wearing scarves that just covered the head. In rural areas, women do
    chores, tend animals, gather water and fire wood and, when working in
    the fields, do not wear burqas and enjoy a greater degree of mobility
    than female city-dwellers.
        The Taliban also restricted education for girls, particularly in
    Kabul. Kabul's private home-based schools, which had quietly continued
    to operate, were ordered closed last year, though we understand some
    were allowed to reopen since. Although the Taliban claims that it is
    not against female education and has requested resources for
    Afghanistan's minimal educational infrastructure, these claims ring
    hollow. The militia has taken little real action to provide for female
    education.
        Women's and girls' access to medical services and hospitals has
    been drastically reduced. Although they reportedly are allowed to
    receive emergency care in all Kabul hospitals and non-emergency care in
    a few, women have died because male doctors were not allowed to treat
    them. The lack of ready access to medical facilities that do exist is
    further impacted by shortages of medicine and equipment. I commend
    Physicians for Human Rights for bringing this horrible situation to the
    attention of the world in its survey and report of women's health and
    human rights under the Taliban in Kabul.
        The United States condemns Taliban policies publicly. Secretary of
    State Albright, during her visit to the Nasir Bagh refugee camps in
    Pakistan described the Taliban's treatment of women as ``despicable.''
    She said ``We are opposed to their (the Taliban's) approach to human
    rights, to their despicable treatment of women and children, and their
    lack of respect for human dignity, in a way more reminiscent of the
    past than the future.'' At the Human Rights Day celebration last
    December, the First Lady recognized two Afghan women in the audience
    for their invaluable work on behalf of women and girls and also said
    ``We cannot allow these terrible crimes against women and girls--and,
    truly, against all of humanity--to continue with impunity. We must all
    make it unmistakably clear this terrible suffering inflicted on the
    women and girls of Afghanistan is not cultural, it is criminal. And we
    must do everything we can in our power to stop it.'' The President also
    pledged continued assistance to the women suffering under the Taliban
    regime.
        In international fora, we also speak out. We drafted the country
    resolutions on Afghanistan for this year and last year's annual meeting
    of the UN's Commission on the Status of Women (CSW). Along with other
    U.S. officials, I have personally raised the issue in meetings with
    senior Taliban and Pakistani officials.
        I note the campaign instituted by the Feminist Majority and other
    human rights and women's organizations designed to raise our
    consciousness and to help Afghan women and girls. The State Department
    looks forward to working with them in this endeavor.
        My colleague, Assistant Secretary of State for Population, Refugee
    and Migration Affairs Julia Taft, will inform you later in this hearing
    regarding what we are doing on the ground in Afghanistan, Pakistan and
    Iran to help all Afghans, but specifically Afghan women and girls,
    despite difficulty caused by the continuing conflict, security
    problems, and pressure from the Afghan factions, including the Taliban.
    The United States, as the largest individual contributor to Afghan
    relief, has a record that we all can be proud of.
    Regional stability and the search for peace
        I want to move to a broader area of concern--regional stability.
    The ongoing conflict has affected the entire region and beyond,
    spilling over into neighboring countries. I have spoken of drugs and
    terrorism. Let me also mention the refugees, arms-trafficking, ethnic
    and religious conflict, and the obstacle the ongoing fighting poses for
    those who want to see Afghanistan regain its traditional role as an
    important trade route between Central and South Asia.
        Events in Afghanistan rightfully have alarmed its neighbors.
    Terrorists trained in Afghanistan operate in neighboring states. The
    conflict itself threatens to spread. Last year, we saw a danger of a
    wider war when, following the killing of Iranian officials in Mazar-i-
    Sharif by Taliban forces retaking the city, Iran increased troop
    deployments on its border with Pakistan and Afghanistan and held
    largescale maneuvers. Fortunately, the U.N. was able to defuse this
    crisis, but as long as the fighting goes on, there is a danger it will
    draw in neighboring countries.
        We all agree the war has gone on far too long. The question arises
    what we are doing to bring it to a close, both bilaterally and through
    the U.N.-led peace effort.
        We strongly support the U.N.'s efforts, particularly the work of
    the Secretary General's special envoy Ambassador Lakhdar Brahimi. We
    participate enthusiastically in Ambassador Brahimi's group of Six-plus-
    Two--composed of Afghanistan's six neighbors (Pakistan, Iran,
    Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and China), Russia and the United
    States. I have participated in Six plus Two meetings in New York. The
    group represents an effort to have influential countries press the
    Afghan factions toward a ceasefire and a negotiated settlement. The
    Six-plus-two includes the key external players and it also
    provides a means by which, under the aegis of the U.N., we work
    constructively to bring peace to the region.
        The Six plus Two developed a series of Points of Common
    Understanding at its September 21 meeting in which Secretary of State
    Albright represented the United States. These points were communicated
    to the various factions. The call for a ceasefire and a settlement was
    unfortunately not taken up by the Afghan parties, particularly by the
    Taliban, which at that time had made several major military advances
    against its opponents and believed that it would inevitably be
    victorious.
        Circumstances today are different. We believe resistance to the
    Taliban is growing. There is organized opposition to them in the newly-
    occupied areas in the North and in the Hazarajat, and even in Pashtun-
    inhabited areas there have been violent cultural clashes and protests
    against conscription. Masood's forces also remain in the field. It
    should be clearer to all there is no military solution in sight. The
    U.N. now hopes to move the factions, including the Taliban, further
    along the road toward peace. Ambassador Brahimi is in the region now,
    meeting with all the factions and Afghanistan's neighbors in an effort
    to advance the process, particularly by narrowing differences between
    Pakistan and Iran, the principal supporters of the Taliban and the
    Northern Alliance respectively. The U.N. efforts, coupled with those of
    the Government of Turkmenistan, have had some initial success.
    Representatives of the Taliban and the Northern Alliance are due to
    meet in Ashgabat, the capital of Turkmenistan, tomorrow, March 10, in
    direct negotiations. Ambassador Brahimi sounded a note of caution
    saying, ``I won't say this is the last chance, but I would appeal to
    them--referring to the warring parties--not to disappoint the Afghan
    people once again.'' He urged the parties, on behalf of U.N. Secretary
    General Kofi Annan, to go to the talks with ``a spirit of compromise
    and understanding, patience and a constructive approach.'' We agree
    with these sentiments.
        The Six-plus-Two also has endorsed a proposal by Uzbekistan to host
    a meeting of deputy foreign ministers in Tashkent that would engage the
    Afghan parties in a concerted effort to end the fighting. Work is
    ongoing in New York on a political declaration but more groundwork will
    be needed to ensure a successful meeting. In particular, all Six-plus-
    Two members must accept that the ongoing conflict is in no one's
    interest and act accordingly. It is a fact that some Six-plus-Two
    members rendered or facilitated assistance to their favored Afghan
    clients, providing arms, munitions, economic help, and military
    advisers.
        On the bilateral level we maintain contact with the Afghan factions
    and other key interested countries in an effort to promote peace. This
    evening I plan to leave Washington for our regular consultations with
    Russia on South Asian issues in which Afghanistan will play a prominent
    part.
        We also are in contact with neutral Afghans currently attempting to
    organize a dialogue aimed at convoking a grand national assembly--loya
    jirga--designed to bring a peaceful end to the war. I met in Peshawar
    on February 2 with several distinguished Afghan moderates including
    former president Mojaddedi, Pir Gailani, and Hamid Karzai. We have
    supported this effort publicly and privately to get Afghans involved
    directly in the search for peace. We have also been in direct contact
    with His Majesty Zahir Shah, the former king of Afghanistan, who
    retains the admiration and good wishes of many inside and outside his
    country. I met with him in Rome on November 16.
        We admire those Afghans who are striving to bind their nation's
    wounds. Moderate Afghans have often been under threat from extremists
    for their efforts and these threats are indeed real. We condemn the
    despicable murder in Peshawar, Pakistan earlier this year of the wife,
    son, and bodyguard of prominent neutral and war hero Abdul Haq. We
    extend to him and to his family our deepest sympathies. This was a
    cowardly act of terrorism of the worst sort.
    U.S. policy
        Let me conclude by summarizing U.S. policy with respect to the
    ongoing conflict in Afghanistan. The United States supports no
    individual Afghan faction but maintains contacts with all to further
    progress toward a peaceful settlement. We recognize none of the
    contending factions as the Government of Afghanistan and have no plans
    to do so. We would be prepared to recognize a Government of Afghanistan
    that was broad-based, multiethnic, and representative and respected
    international norms of behavior on issues of concern to the world
    community including terrorism, narcotics, and human rights,
    particularly the rights of women and girls and minorities. We believe
    that only such a government could bring peace to Afghanistan and gain
    the acceptance of other nations and represent Afghanistan effectively
    in international organizations. But while we are neutral regarding the
    factions, we are emphatically not neutral regarding their behavior and
    criticize or encourage them as we see fit. Unfortunately there has been
    little of an encouraging note in recent years.
        Thus we continue to be actively engaged in this effort on several
    fronts, in the U.N., in Washington, in the region, and elsewhere. Our
    efforts have not yet met with success. The fighting continues, the
    Afghan people suffer, the effects of the conflict spill over into
    neighboring lands and beyond. But as I have said before, without our
    direct involvement, this conflict will likely only continue to fester
    causing even greater damage to our own interests and to those of the
    Afghan people.

                      summary statement of hon. julia taft

        Senator McConnell. We have a vote at 2:45, which is the
    only vote we will have today because of the snow. I think what
    I will do is call a brief recess, let Senator Leahy and myself
    go over and catch this vote right at the beginning, and then we
    will be back and we will be able to finish the rest of the
    hearing.
        [A brief recess was taken.]
        Senator McConnell. Secretary Taft, why do you not pick
    right up there, and we will pose our questions after you
    finish. We will make your entire statement a part of the
    record.
        Ms. Taft. Thank you very much, sir. I am really very
    pleased to be here not only to represent the humanitarian face
    of the foreign policy, but also to speak to what we consider
    one of the most horrific situations in terms of human rights
    and refugee crises in the world.
        One of my first visits as Assistant Secretary for
    Population, Refugees, and Migration was to go to Pakistan and
    Afghanistan, and to look firsthand at what is one of the
    largest, longest-standing and most complex humanitarian
    concerns in the world. It has remained a central preoccupation
    of our Bureau and we have had to make a number of shifts both
    in resources and in program concepts to adapt to the new
    challenges of humanitarian assistance requirements created by
    the Taliban.
        Let me just speak for a minute. My colleague, Assistant
    Secretary Inderfurth, went into very good detail about the
    situation, but I wanted to add a brief description of what
    happened 20 years ago. I think he started 10 years ago.
        Some 20 years ago, when the Soviet troops invaded
    Afghanistan, the flow that was precipitated mostly to Iran and
    to Pakistan, was 6 million refugees, and now the count is down
    to about 2.4 million refugees, 1.2 million in Pakistan and the
    remaining in Iran.
        When we think about the 4 million people who went back to
    Afghanistan, they went back beginning in 1989 and are still
    trickling back in today. But 4 million people have gone back to
    what they thought was going to be freedom and a new life, and
    you have described quite well what they have found.
        During this period of time, Pakistan has remained a very
    generous country of first asylum. Over the course of 20 years,
    they have hosted a total of over 3 million people. Now it is
    1.2 million. They are getting very tired, and you will see
    reports that various officials in the northwest frontier
    province are saying they want to put everybody back into
    refugee camps. Well, they cannot even find these people. Many
    of them have already integrated into the local economy. They
    have established their lives. They have really fit into
    Pakistan fairly well, even though they are Afghans. But this is
    because many of them not only have been there for 20 years, but
    also they are in Pashtun origin and could fit into the economy
    fairly well of the northwest frontier province.
        There are, however, new refugees coming out of Afghanistan,
    and Pakistan has not allowed them to be registered. We are
    looking very closely and working with the UNHCR to make sure
    these people are identified and provided services because we
    believe there is a protection mandate that is critical here and
    much more needs to be done.
        In the mid-1990's when repatriation appeared to be a
    durable solution, the UNHCR and all of the implementing
    partners really started focusing on Afghanistan. That was where
    people were going to be going back to. That was where there
    should be projects for schools and hospitals, et cetera. The
    programs for first asylum in Pakistan shrunk considerably.
    While the focus was on Afghanistan, donations to UNHCR programs
    in Pakistan declined because there was no longer much of a
    first asylum requirement.
        We have now soberly realized collectively that repatriation
    is not as viable as it should be in Afghanistan, and in fact
    the people who are still in Pakistan probably are not going to
    go back to Afghanistan anytime soon. So, we are in a position
    now of having to try to reestablish some school programs,
    reestablish health services for women and girls in particular.
    We think those programs in Pakistan may be the best chance for
    these girls to get education in their lifetime. So, we are
    starting these over again. This has just been within the past
    year, and we have put in substantial funding for those. I can
    go into detail later if you are interested in exactly what we
    are doing, but we are putting in about $3.3 million for women
    and girls' programs, primarily in Pakistan.
        We are also, however, still supporting the UNHCR generally
    at 25 percent for their appeals, and we are supporting their
    requests for support for people who do want to go back into
    Afghanistan. It is a choice of the refugees themselves whether
    they choose to return, and for those who self-select to return,
    we are offering assistance through the UNHCR for initial cash
    and food.
        For resettlement outside of Pakistan and Afghanistan, we do
    have a program of resettlement that we are restarting. Again,
    this is connected to our own refugee resettlement program in
    the United States. Out of the total of 78,000 refugees that we
    will bring to the United States this year, we expect maybe 500
    will come from Afghan refugees who are in Pakistan. We have a
    particular focus for those people we would resettle in the
    States: Those who are Afghan, educated women, or women
    particularly vulnerable with children who have virtually no
    hope of making a satisfactory adjustment in Pakistan or in
    Afghanistan.
        Now, we have identified more than 700 candidates. The
    Immigration and Naturalization Service is helping us. However,
    the INS must schedule a circuit ride, so we will be hoping to
    get some of these people approved for admission within the next
    month or so.
        I would also like to say that Iran has also been a generous
    host to Afghan refugees. They have absorbed about 3 million
    during this 20-year period. They are now down to 1.4 million.
    Unlike the approach that was taken initially in Pakistan, most
    of the refugees that went to Iran were just allowed to go into
    the economy, so there have never been any big camps or any big
    programs for those in Iran. Only about 25,000 have been in
    camps.
        Recently, however, the Iranian economy has really taken a
    slump, and Iran's welcome for the refugees seems to have
    diminished. We have reports that there have been some
    involuntary repatriations of Afghan refugees along the border.
    We have been unable to substantiate those because the UNHCR is
    unable to go into Afghanistan for security reasons. So, we do
    not know exactly what this refoulment problem might be.
        We are considering--but we have no recommendation to either
    to make our fellow colleagues in the State Department or in
    fact to Congress, but we are considering perhaps some augmented
    NGO programs in Iran which would supplement what the UNHCR is
    doing because of the conditions becoming apparently more
    severe. There will be an NGO meeting in April in Iran to look
    at requirements for human services for these refugees. If we
    get some ideas about particular approaches that we could
    support, we stand ready to assist.
        With regard to the focus of our assistance in Afghanistan,
    ever since the refugees started repatriating, we have funded
    about 25 percent of the UNHCR programs. But in addition to
    that, we have supported the ICRC, and, in fact, the
    International Committee for the Red Cross programs is the only
    program that has stayed in Afghanistan all these years. They
    did not even leave last summer with all of the security
    problems and the change of circumstances. So, we continue to
    fund them fulsomely, and we are funding NGO programs for
    pharmaceuticals, for health care, for some school programs, and
    some refugee repatriation programs that are in rural areas.
        I have seen these programs. At least I saw them last year.
    Even though the expatriate staff is no longer in Afghanistan,
    these programs are still going on to a modest degree. We are
    hoping at some point soon we will be able to infuse more
    resources and actually get some expatriate oversight of these
    programs soon.
        That leads me to the biggest issue that we have outside of
    the human rights concerns with Taliban, and that is the
    security of relief workers. The biggest problem that we have is
    trying to secure agreements with the Taliban to allow U.N.
    staff and NGO's the kind of access they need and the personal
    security they need to return permanently. Negotiations have
    been ongoing for at least a year, not just on security, but a
    year ago there were major criticisms of the Taliban with regard
    to the access by women and girls to various services.
    Negotiations were conducted at that time between the U.N. and
    the Taliban to ensure that all of the programs would provide
    gender equity.
        As soon as those negotiations were started, there became
    real security concerns, and unfortunately the U.N. had to
    withdraw.
        We are just getting reports now that the U.N. has completed
    its security assessment. It is reporting to New York on its
    recommendations about the return of U.N. workers and NGO's to
    Afghanistan. We have not had a full briefing on this, so I am
    not able to give you the details. We are concerned about
    workers going back, but expect the U.N. to have made an
    appropriate assessment.
        If the workers are able to go back and the U.N. is able to
    improve its presence, we think that donors will be more
    forthcoming in terms of their new assistance inside of
    Afghanistan, and we are hoping that that will at least provide
    appropriate monitors, witnesses, a presence, a western presence
    to try to make sure that the vulnerable people of that society
    are getting the assistance that we expect.
        It is a grim picture, but what I have tried to convey is it
    is a fairly realistic one. We are going to again focus our
    attention on Pakistan where we can reach the refugee girls and
    women and do what we can to improve the services inside of
    Afghanistan when the security is more appropriate.
        With those comments, let me just summarize by saying that
    the U.S. Government's total contributions range upwards of $30
    million, if you consider all the food that is going into the
    various assistance programs. We expect from the Bureau of
    Population, Refugee, and Migration Assistance Act we are going
    to be funding probably close to $20 million this year on these
    programs for refugees as well as people inside of Afghanistan.

                               prepared statement

        With that, let me just thank you for your attention on this
    subject. We are really grateful for the assistance the NGO's
    have given, Physicians for Human Rights and others who have
    called into international attention concerns about the plight
    of the people of Afghanistan. We stand ready to work with you
    and any other way we can to make sure that we can reach those
    who deserve our assistance. Thank you.
        [The statement follows:]
                      Prepared Statement of Julia V. Taft
        I am pleased to be able to speak today on the humanitarian
    situation in Afghanistan. One of my first field visits as Assistant
    Secretary for PRM was to Pakistan and Afghanistan to look into what is
    one of the largest, longest-standing, and most complex humanitarian
    situations in the world. It has remained a central concern of our
    Bureau as we have had to shift resources and programs to adapt to the
    new challenges to humanitarian assistance created by the Taliban in
    Afghanistan.
        Twenty years ago, Soviet troops invaded Afghanistan, precipitating
    the flow of more than six million refugees to Pakistan and Iran. The
    official count today is 2.4 million and over 4 million refugees have
    gone back to Afghanistan since the withdrawal of the Soviets in 1989.
    Those remaining in exile have been in place long enough that the third
    generation is being born. At the same time, ongoing warfare and Taliban
    repression continue to generate new refugees. Within Afghanistan, one
    million or more Afghans are displaced from their homes. Nearly all
    Afghans are impoverished by the devastation of war. Recent severe
    earthquakes only seem to compound Afghanistan's misery.
        A/S Inderfurth has outlined for you what the USG is doing to
    promote a political solution to the situation in Afghanistan. I will
    focus on humanitarian concerns. While the humanitarian situation
    ultimately can only be effectively addressed with a political solution,
    there are things that we can and are doing to try to ameliorate the
    current situation of vulnerable people--particularly refugees in
    Pakistan and Iran. Unfortunately, what we can accomplish for vulnerable
    populations in Afghanistan is severely limited by the security
    situation and by Taliban policies.
        I will start with the refugees.
                              refugees in pakistan
        Pakistan has been a very generous country of first asylum. Over the
    course of 20 years, they have hosted some three million refugees, 1.2
    million of whom remain in Pakistan at this time.
        The largest group of Afghans in Pakistan--probably a significant
    majority--have been in Pakistan so long and are so well-established
    that they are not likely to return. They are preponderantly Pashtun who
    have integrated into the economy. The bulk of the remainder live in
    refugee camps close to the border and would likely return. Also mostly
    Pashtun, they are being held back by economic or other practical
    considerations, like schools and health care, rather than fear of
    persecution. Their needs are likely for targeted repatriation and
    reintegration assistance.
        There are also refugees in Pakistan who are sometimes referred to
    as the Afghan elite, or intelligentsia. Located mostly in Peshawar,
    they are relatively affluent but could not return to a Taliban
    Afghanistan. These may be candidates for resettlement in third
    countries and we are particularly looking at female heads of household
    who are experiencing difficulty in remaining in Pakistan and now would
    be particularly vulnerable if they return to Afghanistan.
        And, there are the new arrivals, who fled from the Taliban after
    its recent victories. These refugees only began arriving in Pakistan
    (and Iran) in late 1998. While Pakistan does not register refugees, it
    does grant prima facie status to all Afghans. We believe there are real
    needs for relief and protection for these new arrivals and have been
    working with UNHCR to address these needs--especially to ensure that
    protection is adequate.
        When, in the mid-1990s, repatriation appeared to be the durable
    solution after the retreat of the Soviets, UNHCR and its implementing
    partners began to scale back care and maintenance programs
    dramatically, leaving in place modest efforts on behalf of the most
    vulnerable. Facing many new complex humanitarian emergencies around the
    world, donors were happy to re-direct their resources to more needy
    populations. However, repatriation has slowed. New refugees are
    arriving. And the Taliban's policies and actions--particularly as
    regards women, girls, and minorities--have horrified the world.
        In response, we have reversed our phase-out strategy and last year
    funded a number of new or renewed NGO assistance projects in Pakistan.
    In infusing new funding, we have focused our efforts on women in
    recognition of the central importance of women's well-being to the
    well-being of their children and entire families. Health and education
    for women and girls are the prime project areas. This may be one of the
    few opportunities that the international community has to address
    educational needs of Afghan women and girls in the near future.
        We are also continuing our financial support to UNHCR's
    repatriation program. While some have suggested that no refugees,
    particularly women, should return to Afghanistan while the Taliban is
    in control there, ultimately this is a decision that the refugees
    themselves must make. Our assistance through UNHCR would provide
    initial cash and food for those refugees who self-select to return.
                                refugees in iran
        Like Pakistan, Iran has been a rather generous host to as many as
    three million Afghan refugees, of whom 1.4 million reside there today.
    Only a handful of refugees (about 25,000) were held in camps, with most
    allowed to integrate into the economy--at least until 1992, after which
    time new refugees have been less able to obtain the required residency
    documents. With the Iranian economy in a slump, Iran's welcome for
    Afghan refugees has diminished. Since December Iran has reportedly
    returned 15,000 or more Afghans to Afghanistan. It is not entirely
    clear who is being expelled or under what circumstances, but it may be
    a mixture of economic migrants and refugees, and a mixture of voluntary
    and forced repatriation. Although there are no reports of Taliban
    mistreatment of returnees, because of security concerns, UNHCR does not
    have an expatriate presence in Afghanistan to protect returnees.
        Most assistance in Iran is provided by the government. UNHCR has
    provided some reimbursement for health services and complementary aid
    in the camps. UNHCR began to reorient care and maintenance efforts
    toward self-reliance in 1997. A European coalition of NGOs--the
    International Consortium for Refugees in Iran (ICRI)--plans a symposium
    in April in Iran to engender additional knowledge of refugee needs,
    particularly in education. We will watch the outcome of this conference
    closely for new information about refugees in Iran. Before seeking to
    address any unmet needs of Afghan refugees in Iran other than through
    UNHCR, we would certainly want to consult with Congress.
                     humanitarian situation in afghanistan
        Let me turn to the humanitarian situation inside Afghanistan.
        There hardly appears to be a corner of Afghanistan not touched and
    impoverished by decades of conflict. There are other countries where
    the USG is working to provide humanitarian assistance that have been
    similarly devastated. Liberia and Cambodia come immediately to mind.
    But there are few where the authorities systematically present so many
    challenges to the provision of humanitarian assistance.
        Most attention on the Taliban's human rights record has been
    focussed on their mistreatment of women. Indeed, the Taliban violate
    the human rights of almost all Afghans in ways ranging from
    restrictions on political and religious freedoms to the horrific murder
    of thousands of people in Mazar-i-Sharif last summer.
        The Taliban maintain that the measures they have taken concerning
    women are for women's own protection. Regardless of what their intent
    is, the effect of their policies is to strip women of their human
    rights, and to seriously damage the physical well-being of women by
    denying them healthcare and employment. In our view, the greatest
    problems facing Afghan women are poverty, lack of education, and lack
    of health care. The actions of the Taliban which most trouble us are:
      --the denial of employment outside the home to women, which by
            denying women a livelihood is directly life-threatening,
            especially to Afghanistan's thousands of war-widows;
      --the denial of education to girls;
      --and a combination of restrictions on movement, employment of women
            health workers, and treatment of women by male doctors, which
            together limit women's access to health care.
        The USG is committed to provision of humanitarian assistance in
    Afghanistan, notwithstanding our strong disagreements with the Taliban
    on human rights, narcotics, and terrorism issues. This is consistent
    with the overall USG policy of trying to address humanitarian needs of
    vulnerable populations, even in countries with which we have strong
    political disagreements. The international community unanimously
    concluded at the Tokyo meeting of the Afghan Support Group in December
    to push for secure access by the U.N. and NGOs throughout Afghanistan
    and to fund humanitarian programs on a basis of gender equality. And
    foreign ministers of those parties engaged in trying to resolve the
    political situation in Afghanistan--the ``6+2''--have called for
    resumption of humanitarian assistance as soon as possible. The
    international and non-governmental organizations with whom we are
    working are all desperately anxious to be able to work freely to meet
    the needs of vulnerable Afghans, especially women and girls.
        But, as you well know, there are major constraints to international
    humanitarian action in Afghanistan.
        First, security. The ongoing conflict continues to inflict damage,
    impede reconstruction, and impair the security of both Afghans and aid
    workers. Moreover, there are still questions about the Taliban's
    commitment to ensuring security. Last August, most expatriate
    humanitarian workers were withdrawn from Afghanistan following the
    murder and kidnapping of some humanitarian staff. The U.N. and the
    Taliban subsequently concluded an MOU on the security protocol for
    return. We firmly support the U.N. position that expatriate staff not
    return until credible guarantees are in place. We and other donors have
    urged NGOs not to return expat staff until U.N. expat staff return.
    Some have nonetheless returned and we know that there are differing
    views on this issue.
        However, particularly given the need to improve the security
    situation of humanitarian workers worldwide, we have believed that the
    NGO community should maintain solidarity with the U.N. on the security
    issue. We have given our concerns about the current security situation
    to the U.N., and drawn their attention in particular to the threat
    posed by Osama Bin Laden. The U.N. is currently intensively reviewing
    the security situation.
        Second, Taliban policies and reprehensible human rights record. The
    USG has been unstinting in both our condemnation of Taliban human
    rights violations--particularly against women and girls--and in our
    efforts to promote a united donor front that will enable us to engage
    the Taliban on changing its repressive policies. We have publicly
    condemned the Taliban's human rights violations in multiple fora--for
    example the U.N. Commission on the Status of Women, the U.N. Security
    Council, and the Afghan Support Group. But beyond the human rights
    issue, the Taliban's position on women constrains the delivery of
    humanitarian assistance, because it challenges the basic humanitarian
    principle that such assistance must be available equally to
    beneficiaries, without regard to gender, race, or other
    characteristics.
        The international community has remained firm in the conviction
    that the most effective levers to ensure appropriate assistance to
    Afghanistan is through a Principled Common Program--under the direction
    of UNOCHA--the U.N. Coordinator for Afghanistan. ``Principled'' refers
    to the goal of having all assistance programs conform to standards that
    require gender equity in access to project benefits, that require non-
    discrimination against minorities (e.g., Shia, non-Pashtuns), that
    include reference to the cross-cutting goal of drug control, and that
    avoid giving undue power to the Taliban authorities while focusing on
    local capacity building. ``Common'' refers to donor agreement to abide
    by the same basic principles and to the idea of integrated, mutually
    reinforcing project development.
        For the moment, there is agreement among all major donors on
    several operating principles:
      --donors should seek to fund what is in the UNOCHA appeal and not use
            scarce funds on activities that are outside of the appeal;
      --no U.N. expatriates should return to Afghanistan until the Taliban
            has implemented the terms of the security MOU and given
            credible assurances on security;
      --NGOs should be encouraged to follow the U.N. in keeping expatriates
            out of Afghanistan;
      --humanitarian agencies should not submit to the mahram edict (that
            is the Taliban policy that requires Muslim women--even non-
            Afghans--to be accompanied in public by a close male relative)
            ;
      --projects that do not protect the human rights of women, girls, and
            minorities should not be funded;
      --urgent humanitarian assistance should not be subject to
            conditionality but development assistance or other new
            assistance could be subjected to conditionality on human rights
            principles and drug control;
        I would not be honest if I did not say that it is difficult to
    maintain consensus on all such issues as time goes on, especially given
    the tensions created by the keen desire to resume full international
    humanitarian assistance inside Afghanistan. As an illustration of the
    difficulty, take the issue of assistance in Kabul. Some donors will not
    fund any programs in Kabul, believing that Taliban restrictions there
    make it impossible to provide assistance on a principled basis. Other
    donors take a project-by-project approach, funding programs. The U.N.,
    for its part, has decided to provide only ``life-saving'' assistance in
    Kabul.
        About ten days ago, I chaired a monthly coordination meeting that
    we have with the NGO sector of the international humanitarian
    assistance community and with USAID. U.S.-based NGOs represented there
    could not agree on whether urgent aid should be limited to
    ``lifesaving''. Or even on the definition. All more or less agreed that
    education was not strictly lifesaving; but we would all be loath to not
    provide education to women and girls where possible.
        At that same meeting, some NGO representatives argued that it would
    be wrong to provide assistance to those refugees repatriating because
    that could be construed as promoting--or even forcing--return to an
    Afghanistan that does not respect the rights of all of its citizens.
    Others--equally passionately--argued that it would be wrong to deny
    help to those who want to go home of their own free will. In fact, as a
    practical matter, unless we are prepared to use some kind of force, the
    USG may neither tell a refugee when to return home nor prevent him or
    her from doing so.
                                 usg assistance
        As I conclude my remarks today, I would like to outline for you
    what my Bureau and its partner USG agencies are doing in terms of
    funding. I believe that you all have received as background for this
    hearing a detailed accounting of PRM assistance for Afghan refugees and
    conflict victims over the last five years. Our assistance for Afghan
    refugees has been ongoing now for 19 years.
        In the last fiscal year--fiscal year 1998--PRM provided some $8.3
    million in earmarked contributions through international and non-
    governmental organizations. Of that amount, over $3.3 million was for
    projects that specifically targeted programs for Afghan women and
    girls, including $1.5 million for education and health in Pakistan. An
    additional $14.8 million was contributed to the general regional
    appeals for UNHCR and ICRC--a significant proportion of the latter was
    for programs for Afghans in Afghanistan.
        Also in fiscal year 1998:
      --USAID's Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance provided nearly
            $7 million for earthquake relief and for internally displaced
            and other vulnerable persons inside Afghanistan.
      --The U.S. pledge of food commodities was 100,000 tons of wheat to
            Afghanistan for delivery via the U.N. World Food Program.
      --Important complementary assistance for demining ($2 million),
            counternarcotics ($1.54 million) and U.N. coordination
            ($500,000) came from several State Department accounts.
        For this current fiscal year, we anticipate that PRM funding will
    be at least at the level of last year, though, as I have indicated, we
    do not know at this point just what kind of assistance will be able to
    be implemented inside Afghanistan. Other assistance already decided for
    this year includes:
      --$2 million in demining assistance from the NADR program,
      --100,000 MT of wheat from the USDA Section 416 (b) program,
      --$500,000 for UNOCHA coordination from the IO Bureau, and
      --$25,000 to date from USAID/OFDA for earthquake relief.
      --In addition, our Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor has
            committed to contributing $200,000 in fiscal year 1999 Human
            Rights and Democracy Funds to the U.N. Consolidated Appeal for
            Afghanistan. The funds would be targeted to women's democracy/
            human rights advocacy-building programs within the Appeal. The
            South Asia bureau has agreed to commit $200,000 from its fiscal
            year 1999 ESF regional democracy funds for the same type of
            programs in the Appeal specifically targeting Afghan women.
        While third-country resettlement may not be the appropriate durable
    solution for Afghan refugees in general, there are certain refugees who
    are at risk because of the Taliban takeover and who cannot integrate
    locally in Pakistan. Of particular concern are educated urban women, as
    well as widows and single heads of household. We expect to resettle
    several hundred such refugees in the United States. To ensure that
    these cases are adjudicated promptly, we have authorized the hiring of
    an experienced case worker in Islamabad to supplement the efforts of
    the NGO and INS processing personnel that visit Pakistan periodically
    on circuit rides.
                             expectations for 1999
        Unfortunately, there seems little prospect that the Taliban will
    make major changes soon in their human rights policies. So we expect
    the present situation of chronic conflict and repressive rule by a
    presumptive authority that falls short of being a government to
    continue. Meeting basic human needs of many Afghans is likely to
    continue to depend on international assistance. At the same time, the
    environment for delivering that assistance is likely to remain
    difficult and dangerous. Even if the situation improves to the point
    where international aid workers can return to Afghanistan, every day is
    likely to bring a struggle with Taliban interference and restrictions,
    and poverty and lack of infrastructure.
        This is a grim picture, but, we believe, a realistic one. Against
    this backdrop, let me say once again that the USG is committed to
    provision of humanitarian assistance, even under difficult
    circumstances, that responds to the needs of Afghan refugees, conflict
    victims, and vulnerable--especially the women and girls.
        I would be happy to respond to additional questions that you may
    have.

                         strike against osama bin laden

        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Ms. Taft.
        Mr. Inderfurth, could you outline for me what you think the
    benefits were of the strike against Osama bin Laden?
        Mr. Inderfurth. The strike on August 20th against his
    training facilities in Afghanistan we think sent a very
    powerful message to him and to his supporters and to those
    around the world that were watching that the United States
    would, indeed, respond to attacks on U.S. interests wherever
    they may occur. We think that there has been a practical
    effect, which is a disruption of his activities. He has clearly
    been since that time much more on the move and on guard with
    respect to his activities.
        We have not been successful in accomplishing our objective
    of seeing him expelled from Afghanistan and brought to justice.
    We are continuing to make that effort, not only by those of us
    working in the diplomatic field--and I had meetings in
    Islamabad on February 3rd with Taliban officials to underscore
    the points that I made in my testimony and we are discussing
    here--but also others within the U.S. Government that are
    working on this problem quite literally around the clock.
        There is no question that there was disruption. There is no
    question that they got a very powerful message, but there is
    also no question that bin Laden remains a threat. And as we
    have said to the Taliban and to others, we reserve the right to
    act again either preemptively or in retaliation for terrorist
    activities undertaken or planned by bin Laden.
        Senator McConnell. So, no progress on the effort to locate
    and extradite him?
        Mr. Inderfurth. Mr. Chairman, in terms of the location of
    bid Laden, we do believe that he remains in Afghanistan itself
    despite some earlier reports that he may have left or that he
    had left Taliban-controlled territory. I would rather have a
    closed discussion with you about his location and what we
    actually know about that.
        His expulsion. We have seen no effort by the Taliban to
    expel, but again we believe that certain steps have been taken
    that have disrupted his activities that have made it more
    difficult for him to communicate, that he seems to be moving
    around a great deal. But we still believe that he has the
    capability to harm U.S. interests and we are going to pursue
    that.
        Senator McConnell. How do you see the Russian-Iranian
    relationship in the context of the Afghan problem?
        Mr. Inderfurth. Both the Russians and the Iranians have
    supported the Northern Alliance, the principal opposition to
    the Taliban. They have supplied certain materiel over the years
    to the Northern Alliance. I think a map has been attached to my
    testimony of the 15 percent or so that remains in Northern
    Alliance hands of Afghanistan. This is principally Commander
    Masood in the Panshir Valley.
        It is our view, as I stated in my testimony, that there can
    be no military solution to what is taking place in Afghanistan.
    Despite the fact the Taliban has increased its hold over the
    country geographically, we do not believe that they will be
    able to subjugate the country and to exert total control, that
    there will continue to be resistance in part because other
    countries with an interest there continue to supply those
    forces opposed to the Taliban. So, both the Russians and the
    Iranians remain involved in that fashion.
        They also remain involved diplomatically. They are part of
    the so-called Six plus Two process, and we believe that they
    both would be willing, based on our contacts with them, to work
    constructively if the Taliban were willing to sit down at the
    table with the other factions and to start working toward a
    peaceful resolution to establish a broad-based government.
        Senator McConnell. How have somewhat similar views of this
    problem affected our relationship with Iran?
        Mr. Inderfurth. I cannot speak beyond the Six plus Two
    process. I have taken part in those meetings in New York.
    Secretary Albright was there last September where she took part
    at a ministerial of the Six plus Two. The Iranians have, as I
    said, been engaged in that. We have had exchanges across the
    table. They have been constructive in their comments. I believe
    that, for reasons that Assistant Secretary Taft has pointed
    out, they want to see this conflict come to an end. They have
    refugees. They have had dislocations. They are very concerned
    about the narcotics spillover. Iran has taken very tough
    measures to deal with narcotics and trafficking, but they have
    the Hazara Shia minority in Afghanistan that they intend to
    look after their interests and not to see the Taliban repress
    them.
        So, there is their religious, their cultural, their
    historical connotations here as well as humanitarian. The
    Iranians I think are willing to work for a positive solution
    there, but in the meantime, until the Taliban indicates its
    willingness to come to the table, Iran will continue to take
    those actions to support the opposition forces it deems
    necessary.
        Senator McConnell. And now the relationship between
    Pakistan and the Taliban, particularly in view of the fact that
    the Pakistanis now have 3 million drug addicts. Describe for me
    again this relationship and also the apparent lack of concern
    or maybe there is concern that I do not sense here of the
    Pakistanis with regard to the drug problem that they now have.
        Mr. Inderfurth. Pakistan has been over time the principal
    supporter of the Taliban. As Senator Leahy pointed out,
    Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have been the two principal backers
    of the Taliban. The only other country to officially recognize
    the Taliban is the UAE. That is the sum total of diplomatic
    recognition of the Taliban.
        Pakistan is the country most affected by the Afghan
    conflict and has been going back to the Soviet era. As
    Assistant Secretary Taft pointed out, the refugee problem is
    well known and Pakistan has responded in a very compassionate
    fashion over the years to that, and that problem continues.
        They have become increasingly affected by the narcotics
    trafficking that takes place and the number of addicts that we
    now see in Pakistan. Indeed, Pakistan is taking some important
    steps with respect to cooperation with the U.S. on narcotics.
    This year we were able to fully certify cooperation with
    Pakistan on our counter-narcotics efforts. They received full
    certification in this last presidential finding.
        But the drug situation in Afghanistan continues to get
    worse. Despite protestations by the Taliban that they are
    taking steps to eliminate this and that this is un-Islamic, we
    have seen little evidence of that.
        And Pakistan is having that spillover effect of the
    narcotics as well as terrorism. There is no question that some
    of the terrorists that are being trained in Afghanistan are
    affecting the internal situation in Pakistan itself, which
    leads us to the view that Pakistan is beginning to understand
    that what is taking place in Afghanistan under the Taliban is
    adversely affecting the national interests of Pakistan and that
    its support for the Taliban must reflect that.
        We are encouraging Pakistan to use its influence--and it
    has more than any other country--to move the Taliban toward the
    negotiating table. We are encouraging Pakistan to use its
    influence on terrorist issues, not just bin Laden, but the
    camps that are there that would remain even after he left.
        There is no question that internally this is a subject of
    debate within the Pakistani Government. We believe Prime
    Minister Sharif is trying to move in a direction that would
    bring a negotiated settlement, not a military solution, to
    Afghanistan, but it has not taken place yet and we will
    continue trying to encourage them to take those steps.
        Senator McConnell. Senator Leahy.
        Senator Leahy. Mr. Chairman, I remember all the money we
    sent over to Afghanistan for Stinger missiles and other
    military equipment. Now we worry they are being sold and the
    terrorists may use them against us or our allies.
        We supported the anti-Soviet forces there. You know, if you
    are anti-Soviet, therefore you must be good no matter what you
    do. And now we find ourselves and the Russians worrying about
    how you stop the spread of the Taliban's form of fanatical
    fundamentalism.
        Is Russia in a position where they can really work
    consistently on this? I am not thinking of just the pressures
    within their own government. Do they feel that there is enough
    of a sense of self-preservation to work with us?
        Mr. Inderfurth. Well, again, we believe that the Russians
    do want to see a peaceful settlement to the conflict in
    Afghanistan and they are willing to work with us toward that
    end. They are already feeling the effects of the drug trade
    coming through the Central Asian republics. They are feeling
    the effects of terrorism activities, the recent bombings that
    took place in Uzbekistan with President Karimov. Some of the
    suspects that have been picked up as a result of that are
    suspected to have been trained in Afghanistan. So, the Russians
    see the spillover effects and they want to see a solution.
    Therefore, we have tried to have consultations with them at
    least twice a year to see where they are on this.
        But as I pointed out, they will continue to provide support
    to the anti-Taliban factions until there is a recognition by
    the Taliban that they must come to the table and that they
    cannot have a military solution.
        The Russian interests in Afghanistan go back all the way to
    the previous century and the great game and the rest. We
    believe they are playing a new game which is a more
    constructive game. They are not trying to extend empire. They
    do have economic interests because of oil that could flow
    through Afghanistan, pipelines, natural gas, but we believe
    basically the Russians and we have a similar view that there
    should be a political settlement and that they are working
    toward that end.
        Senator Leahy. Pakistan and Saudi Arabia recognize the
    Taliban. They give support to them. Suppose they withdrew their
    recognition and that support. Would that have a major effect on
    the Taliban?
        Mr. Inderfurth. It would have a major effect but not a
    determining effect. We believe that the Taliban can continue
    this war absent external support.
        The fact is that the Saudis have been pulling back their
    support of late. They have downgraded diplomatic recognition
    because the Saudi interest in bin Laden, as you know, is very
    strong. They want to see bin Laden brought to justice. So,
    because the Taliban have not taken the steps that the Saudis
    would like to see, they have downgraded their diplomatic
    representation, and they have taken other steps in terms of any
    assistance that could be provided.
        Pakistan, we also believe, has taken certain steps with
    respect to its assistance, although it has not cut it off, nor
    has it taken any diplomatic steps to de-recognize. We believe
    we may hit that point that the Pakistanis need to take more
    dramatic actions if we do not have the kind of response from
    the Taliban.
        Senator Leahy. You, I am sure, have seen the
    recommendations of Physicians for Human Rights. They say if
    Pakistan closed its border to the transport of fuel and weapons
    and withdrew its military and intelligence presence from
    Afghanistan, that it would have an effect. I would assume a
    significant effect on Afghanistan. But they are not quite to
    that point yet.
        Mr. Inderfurth. They are not at that point. Closing the
    border would be almost impossible. It is a very porous and long
    border. But we believe that Pakistan can do more than it is
    currently doing, and we are urging them to do it.
        Senator Leahy. So, the flip side to that, Ms. Taft, you
    have reports of what happens to Afghan refugees in Pakistan. I
    have heard some disturbing reports about new arrivals. What
    concerns do you have? I am thinking especially of the UNHCR
    program there.
        Ms. Taft. Well, I think that what we are really concerned
    about is who is registering these people who are coming across
    and where are they going and who is protecting them in new
    locations. This phenomenon has only been going on for a short
    time. The UNHCR is present but it is really the Government of
    Pakistan's responsibility to ensure that refugees in the camps
    or wherever they go are protected. That gets into the issue of
    how much is Pakistan willing to draw the line with the presence
    of Taliban activists that might even be in those camps.
        It is an issue we have raised bilaterally with the Pakistan
    authorities. It is an issue that we are working with the UNHCR
    on, but I think that the bottom line is that these camps are
    not as safe as they ought to be and we have to turn to the
    Pakistan authorities to take care of them.
        Now, when we have raised this issue, particularly in those
    in the northwest frontier province, the problem of Taliban
    people coming in and trying to be rabble-rousers has been
    fairly well constrained by the people who are already living
    there, the Afghan refugees living there. But I think it is
    something about which we have to be very vigilant.
        In other places we have been responsive to the UNHCR if
    they have asked for extra money for guard services or civil
    protection or whatever. We do not have a specific proposal from
    them but we would certainly be responsive to that.
        Senator Leahy. You also refer in your testimony to the
    memorandum of understanding between the U.N. and the Taliban
    about the protection of U.N. humanitarian workers if they
    return to Afghanistan.
        Ms. Taft. That is not the UNHCR. That is the U.N. Office--
    --
        Senator Leahy. No. I understand.
        My understanding is that the MOU has been sharply
    criticized because it fails to guarantee access to Afghan women
    and girls to health care and education. Should the U.N. even go
    forward under that MOU, or should they wait until it could be
    renegotiated? I realize that there are tradeoffs either way,
    but I wonder what we accomplish if we go in and women and girls
    are still precluded from health care.
        I was reading this report, for example, and I have seen
    other reports of journalists. When I say this report, for the
    record that is the ``Taliban's War on Women,'' a report by
    Physicians for Human Rights.
        This goes beyond the dark ages. This goes to activity that
    almost predetermines that half the population are going to be
    ill, maltreated, and without any hope whatsoever.
        Ms. Taft. Let me answer this in two or three different
    ways.
        The first one, back to your irony about Russia. I do think
    it is important for us to remember that the time that
    Afghanistan was about as liberal as it has been in a long time
    was when the Russians were there. The Russians said, wait a
    minute. Why are you all wearing these burqas? Why are you not
    getting education? They opened up the universities. They opened
    up the schools to the women, and during the Russian period,
    there was much more openness for women. Is that not an irony.
        Now, where we are right now is there are two features. One
    is this MOU, this memorandum of understanding, really dates
    back to almost a year ago when we were trying to have influence
    with the Taliban on the nature of the programs and saying that
    for life assistance programs, the U.N. would be present but
    they needed to have access to women and girls, as well as men
    equitably. And the other aspect of it was that for development
    programs, there had to be real equity in everything.
        Well, we are not even in the development program stage now
    because it is still a crisis and everything is still an
    emergency.
        This MOU got put aside last summer when two U.N. aid
    workers were killed and overall security concerns after the
    bombings in east Africa resulted in all the expats except ICRC
    evacuating from Afghanistan. The programs that were being
    funded are still operational by and large but they are being
    operated by local employees. So, for instance, the bread
    kitchens for the widows, the 30,000 widows, inside of
    Afghanistan are still going forward, and some of the programs
    that we have had for health care with some medicines through
    Save the Children and some of the assistance through CARE is
    still going on but not with expatriate presence.
        The problem is we cannot really monitor these programs, and
    we cannot really ensure that they are meeting the requirements
    of access by the women. Until we can get the U.N. in and they
    can negotiate a security agreement, we are kind of on hold. And
    today, as I was coming into this meeting, I understand that the
    U.N. is now briefing our people in New York about their intent
    to send teams back into Afghanistan. Once the U.N. is there, I
    think we will be able to go back to the question of access,
    equity, and witnessing.
        Senator Leahy. If your staff could keep mine posted on that
    please.
        Ms. Taft. Yes, sir.
        Senator Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator McConnell. OK. I want to thank you both for joining
    us today. We appreciate it.
                           NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

    STATEMENTS OF:
            HOLLY BURKHALTER, ADVOCACY DIRECTOR, PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN
                RIGHTS
            ZOHRA RASEKH, CONSULTANT, PHYSICIANS FOR HUMAN RIGHTS

        Senator McConnell. The next panel will be Holly Burkhalter
    and Zohra Rasekh.
        This hearing has occurred in large measure because of a
    column brought to my attention on the courageous work done by
    Ms. Rasekh and the Physicians for Human Rights organization to
    gather data on the health and human rights of women in
    Afghanistan. This book, which Senator Leahy made reference to,
    The Taliban's War on Women: A Health and Human Rights Crisis in
    Afghanistan, is in many respects the work of Ms. Rasekh. We
    would like to ask her to come on up. We understand that she has
    just returned from the region and that she has updated research
    begun last summer. We are particularly looking forward to
    hearing from her.

       prepared statement of mavis leno, national board member, feminist
                              majority foundation

        Let me also mention that it had been our plan to have Mavis
    Leno on the panel as well. All the shuttles out of New York
    have been canceled, so she will not be able to be with us. We
    will submit her testimony for the record.
        [The statement follows:]
                        Prepared Statement of Mavis Leno
        I am Mavis Leno, a writer, a resident of Los Angeles, California,
    and a member of the National Board of the Feminist Majority, which was
    founded in 1987 to advocate for equality for women. I chair the
    Feminist Majority's Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid in Afghanistan. I
    would like to thank Senator McConnell and the members of the
    Subcommittee for convening this hearing on the plight of women and
    girls in Afghanistan.
        A militia group, the Taliban, now controls much of Afghanistan.
    Under the Taliban's rule, women and girls have been stripped of their
    basic human rights and women have been held under virtual ``house
    arrest.'' The Taliban has:
      --banned women from employment;
      --banned women from attending universities;
      --banned girls from going to school, and even home schools are
            prohibited;
      --prohibited women from leaving their homes unless accompanied by a
            husband, father, brother, or son;
      --required women who do leave their homes to be covered from head to
            toe in a ``burqa,'' with only a mesh opening to see through;
      --required that the windows of homes with women be painted over so
            the women inside cannot be seen;
      --banned women from being treated by male doctors (the few female
            doctors who are permitted to work are often harassed); and
      --even banned women from wearing white socks and shoes that make
            noise when they walk.
        Women have been beaten, shot at, tortured, and even killed for
    violating these draconian decrees--for merely trying to go to work,
    leaving their homes alone, or violating the Taliban's extreme dress
    orders. Countless Afghan women and girls are forced to beg for food
    because they have no male relatives to support them, and they are not
    allowed to support themselves. A recent State Department report on
    human rights in Afghanistan cites the rape, disappearance, kidnapping,
    and forced marriage of many young women. Physicians for Human Rights
    has amply documented the physical and psychological toll which the
    Taliban's brutal regime has taken on women and girls in Afghanistan.
    Increasing numbers of Afghan women, unable to bear the psychological
    and physical torture of their status, are committing suicide.
        We have heard from multiple sources that girls at the state
    orphanage in Kabul have not been allowed to leave the building to go
    outside since September of 1996--although the boys go outside every day
    to attend school and to play. As of last month, we have been told the
    girls remain confined to the third floor of the orphanage. These girls
    have been traumatized not only by the loss of their parents, but also
    by their cruel imprisonment.
        The abuses of women and girls in Afghanistan have been justified in
    the name of religion and culture. Even if this hideous treatment of
    women and girls were because of religious and cultural preferences, the
    international community concerned with human rights should not accept
    this excuse. However, the Taliban's decrees are foreign to the
    religion, the culture, and the people of Afghanistan. Since the 1950s,
    women and girls in Kabul and in many other parts of the country
    attended co-educational schools. Before the Taliban gained dominance in
    Afghanistan, women were a crucial part of the workforce. In Kabul, for
    example:
      --70 percent of teachers were women;
      --40 percent of doctors were women;
      --over half the university students were women;
      --schools at all levels were co-educational;
      --Afghan women held jobs as lawyers, judges, engineers, and nurses;
            and
      --Afghan women were not required to cover themselves with the burqa.
        The Feminist Majority has spearheaded a campaign by American
    women's organizations to restore women's rights in Afghanistan. To
    date, over 130 women's rights and human rights organizations have
    agreed to co-sponsor our national Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid in
    Afghanistan and have taken actions to urge President Clinton, Secretary
    of State Albright, and United Nations Secretary-General Annan not to
    recognize the Taliban as the official government of Afghanistan and to
    do everything in their power to restore the human rights of Afghan
    women. Some of the supporters of our campaign include American Nurses
    Association, American Medical Women's Association, the YWCA of the USA,
    Planned Parenthood Federation of America, the National Organization for
    Women, General Federation of Women's Clubs, National Council of Women's
    Organizations, Coalition of Labor Union Women, and the Centre for
    Development and Population Activities. The Feminist Majority also has
    generated tens of thousands of petitions from individual women and men.
    State Department officials have said that, in response to our campaign,
    they receive letters daily from people asking them to help the women in
    Afghanistan. The Feminist Majority led demonstrations at the
    Afghanistan and Pakistan embassies in Washington, D.C. in July 1997 to
    protest the abhorrent treatment of women and girls in Afghanistan.
    Shortly after our demonstration, the State Department closed the
    Afghanistan embassy in Washington.
        Feminist Majority President Eleanor Smeal joined European
    Parliament Humanitarian Affairs Commissioner Emma Bonino and women's
    rights leaders from throughout Europe in Brussels last year to announce
    a worldwide campaign to help publicize the plight of women and girls in
    Afghanistan.
        In all our work on this issue in the United States, the public's
    reaction is clear. American people are shocked by the terrifying abuses
    suffered by women and girls in Afghanistan and want the human rights of
    women and girls restored immediately.
        For example, just this past week, ``Dear Abby'' published a letter
    from me about the situation for Afghan women and girls. The letter
    appeared in newspapers across the country, along with our toll-free
    number to join our Campaign to Stop Gender Apartheid. We have been
    overwhelmed by the public's response--thousands and thousands of calls
    have come into our Campaign--women and men outraged by the Taliban's
    oppression of women and girls and anxiously wanting to know what they
    can do to help.
        Our Campaign is growing daily. On March 29, some of the most
    prominent women in the entertainment and media industries will converge
    in Los Angeles for a major public event to raise greater awareness
    about gender apartheid and what the United States can do to secure the
    restoration of women's human rights. I am submitting a copy of the list
    of participants with my testimony--you can see that many highly visible
    women in television and film will be participating. Interest in the
    event and the issue among the media is intense and increasing daily.
        We have remained in constant communication with the State
    Department in order to further United States policies to restore human
    rights to women in Afghanistan. We have met with high-level State
    Department officials, including Theresa Loar, Senior Coordinator for
    International Women's Issues, Karl Inderfurth, Assistant Secretary of
    State for South Asian Affairs, and Julia Taft, Assistant Secretary of
    State for Population, Refugees, and Migration. In particular, we have
    worked closely with the office of the Senior Coordinator for
    International Women's Issues, and wish to express our sincere
    appreciation for the commitment of Ms. Loar and her office on this
    crucial issue of women's rights and human rights.
        We commend the Clinton Administration's decision to refuse to grant
    official recognition of the Taliban and to only recognize a multi-
    ethnic, broad-based government in Afghanistan which restores the human
    rights of women and girls. We salute Secretary of State Madeleine
    Albright for traveling to refugee camps in Pakistan and speaking to
    Afghan women. Secretary of State Albright's outrage and her
    denunciation of the Taliban's treatment of women and girls as
    ``despicable'' was heartening to women in the United States and
    worldwide. We also applaud First Lady Hillary Clinton's strong
    condemnation of the Taliban's policies against women and girls.
    Moreover, we are pleased with the strong resolutions passed by both the
    U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate condemning the violations
    of human rights of women and girls in Afghanistan.
        But we urge the Clinton Administration and Congress to do more. The
    United States bears some responsibility for the conditions of women in
    Afghanistan. For years. our country provided weapons and other military
    resources to Mujahideen groups to fight the Soviets. The Taliban (a
    name which means religious students) is one of the various Pakistan-
    based Mujahideen militia groups.
        The United States also has the ability to bring about change in
    Afghanistan. Two of the United States' international allies, Pakistan
    and Saudi Arabia, have recognized the Taliban and have provided
    substantial support to this regime. Saudi Arabia has long received
    military equipment and assistance from the United States government.
    Pakistan receives assistance from the United States as well. Pakistan
    and Saudi Arabia are the major sources of support and arms for the
    Taliban. Saudi Arabia is a major source of funding for the Taliban. The
    United States government must urge Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to cease
    arming and funding the Taliban.
        The United States also should lift the quotas on the number of
    Afghan refugees. The quota currently is extremely low--in 1998 only
    some 3,200 for the entire region of the Near East and South Asia. The
    number of Afghan refugees accepted in the United States since the
    Taliban takeover is abysmally small. No Afghan refugees were accepted
    in 1996 or 1997, and only 88 in 1998. We urge dramatically increasing
    the number of refugee women and girls from Afghanistan as well as the
    granting of asylum to more Afghan women and girls. Historically, the
    United States has been a refuge for people fleeing economic hardship
    and political turmoil. The situation of women and girls in Afghanistan
    could not be more dire; their persecution could not be more clear.
        Among the letters that we have received since launching our
    campaign is one from a 22-year old Afghan woman. After the Taliban
    killed her father and forbid the education of women, this young woman,
    along with her sister and mother, escaped from Afghanistan to Pakistan.
    In her letter, she tells us that even in Pakistan, Afghan girls are not
    allowed to attend college. She writes, ``I am 22-years-old and like all
    Afghan women I am a victim of war and prejudice. Both my sister and I
    want to finish school. I hope to become a lawyer and my sister wishes
    to become a doctor . . . I am afraid of what will happen to us. We do
    not have a future. I know I have very bad destiny. I cannot go to
    school. I do not have a job. I cannot take care of my old mother. I
    cannot take it any more. Why God made me a woman? Why should I suffer
    all the time? I feel hopeless and I would like to come out of this
    country.''
        We must admit more Afghan women and girls to the United States now,
    especially widows and educated women and girls who are being singled
    out for more harsh treatment.
        Another concern continues to be the planned building of a multi-
    billion dollar gas and oil pipeline from energy-rich Turkmenistan,
    through Afghanistan to Pakistan. California-based UNOCAL, a U.S. energy
    company, was the leading partner in a consortium to build the pipeline
    that includes UNOCAL (46.5 percent stake), Turkmenistan (7 percent),
    and Russia's giant RAO Gazprom (10 percent), Japan's Itochu Corp. and
    Inpex (6.5 percent each), South Korea's Hyundai Engineering and
    Construction Company LTD (5 percent), and Pakistan's Crescent group
    (3.5 percent). UNOCAL, who had first welcomed the Taliban takeover,
    then said it would remain neutral in Afghan internal affairs. Last
    fall, amidst protest from women's rights advocates such as the Feminist
    Majority Foundation, UNOCAL said it was pulling out of the pipeline
    project. Other reports have said Unocal may again consider renewing its
    involvement in the pipeline. According to the Washington Post, the
    Taliban stands to gain up to $100 million dollars a year in royalties
    alone from the pipeline contract.
        We ask the United States government to not support Unocal or any
    other company in business endeavors that ultimately will shore up the
    Taliban. We demand that U.S. corporations not be allowed to operate in
    Afghanistan until the human rights of women and girls are restored.
        Despite their claims to have a religious mandate, the Taliban,
    since they took control of the country, has made Afghanistan the number
    one exporter of heroin in the world. In October. 1997, the World Herald
    of Omaha, Nebraska reported that Afghanistan accounts for one half of
    the raw materials used to produce heroin worldwide, and that the
    Taliban has and continues to allow ``an explosion in planting,
    harvesting and production of opium in Afghanistan.'' Afghanistan's
    largest export is opium, and, according to the State Department, 90-95
    percent of the land where opium is cultivated is controlled by the
    Taliban.
        We understand that the United States also contributes to bilateral
    and multilateral programs to counter opium production by creating
    economic and agricultural alternatives for Afghan people. Obviously,
    these programs are not working and we are concerned that they may in
    fact be providing additional revenue for the Taliban's rule. Most of
    these programs are carried out in Taliban-controlled areas. We believe
    the Taliban is gaining substantial revenues by considerably taxing
    these drug exports. Again, we ask that the United States not contribute
    to any programs that in any way support the maintenance of this
    repressive and barbaric regime.
        Over the past two decades, the United States government and United
    States non- governmental organizations have participated and played a
    leadership role in United Nations human rights and women's rights
    conferences. We all took pride when the platform of the Fourth World
    Conference on Women in Beijing in 1995 reaffirmed that human rights are
    women's rights and that violence against women is a violation of human
    rights. Yet what good are these lofty declarations if we do not free
    the women of Afghanistan.
        Our Campaign is creating hope among the women in Afghanistan as the
    word spreads about the American public's demands that the fundamental
    rights of women and girls be restored. An aid worker just back from
    Afghanistan spoke to women there about our Campaign. Many already knew
    of the Campaign; some cried as they heard more about our activities. I
    have received letters from women in Afghanistan who heard my interview
    on a Voice of America radio broadcast into the country last year. We
    are told that our Campaign has given them hope that the world has not
    forgotten the women of Afghanistan.
        We must end this abhorrent gender apartheid. We cannot stand by
    while over half of a country's population of people--all its women and
    girls--are being denied their basic human rights. Women cannot be safe
    anywhere in the world if any ruling body or government can carry out
    gender apartheid policies with impunity. The United States is a
    powerful player in the South and Central Asia, as well as in the Middle
    East and must do everything in its power to restore women's rights in
    Afghanistan.

                                     ______

        [Clerk's Note.--The following letter was received from UNOCAL in
    rebuttal to the preceding statement from the Feminist Majority
    Foundation.]

                                    Unocal Corporation,
                                    1401 New York Avenue, N.W.,
                                        Washington, DC, March 18, 1999.
    Hon. Mitch McConnell,
    Chairman, Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Senate Appropriations
            Committee, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
        Dear Mr. Chairman: At the March 9, 1999, hearing regarding U.S.
    Policy Toward Afghanistan, your Subcommittee received testimony for the
    record from Ms. Mavis Leno of the Feminist Majority. She inaccurately
    and incorrectly described Unocal's participation in a project in
    Afghanistan. We ask that this letter be included in the formal hearing
    record to provide the Committee with a factually correct and accurate
    statement of our activities.
        As background, in October of 1995, Unocal entered into an agreement
    with the Government of Turkmenistan to link Turkmenistan's vast natural
    gas reserves with the growing Pakistan markets and was guaranteed 25
    tcf of gas from the Dauletabad Field, one of the world's largest
    natural gas fields. In October 1997, the CentGas consortium was formed
    to develop the pipeline project to build a 790-mile pipeline to link
    Turkmenistan's gas reserves to Pakistan, with a possible extension of
    the link to the New Delhi area in India. At the time of its formation,
    the consortium included Unocal, 46.5 percent; Delta Oil Company (Saudi
    Arabia), 15 percent; the Government of Turkmenistan, 7 percent;
    Indonesia Petroleum, Ltd. (Japan), 6.5 percent; Itochu Oil Exploration
    Co., LTD (Japan), 6.5 percent); Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co.,
    Ltd. (Korea), 5 percent; and the Crescent Group (Pakistan), 3.5
    percent. Although RAG Gazprom (Russia) indicated an interest in joining
    the consortium, it has not done so.
        Unocal suspended its activities on the proposed project in August
    1998 and formally withdrew from CentGas in December 1998. Although a
    substantial amount of work was performed to determine the feasibility
    of this project by the consortium (i.e., scope out the construction,
    assess the market for natural gas supply and demand in Pakistan and
    India), the project remains a mere proposal.
        For the record, Unocal never had a commercial agreement with any
    Afghanistan faction, nor did we invest capital in the proposed pipeline
    project. In fact, in light of obvious issues of political instability
    in Afghanistan, we stated repeatedly that we would not participate in
    the construction of a pipeline until a government, recognized by the
    U.S. and UN, was in place (see Unocal testimony before the Near Eastern
    & South Asia Subcommittee, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, October
    22, 1997; Unocal testimony before the House Subcommittee on Asia and
    the Pacific, House Committee on International Relations, February 12,
    1998). In addition, we made it clear that if the project were to go
    forward, we would ensure that women have equal opportunities for
    employment and that all of our employees were treated with respect.
    Contrary to Ms. Leno's statement, Unocal maintained absolute political
    neutrality throughout and neither ``welcomed'' the Taliban nor favored
    any faction. However, efforts were made to keep all factions informed
    of the project. We kept the U.S. Government and regional governments
    informed as well.
        When Unocal decided to terminate its involvement in CentGas, we did
    so strictly for commercial reasons. Unocal did not pull out of the
    proposed project because of external pressure brought by the Feminist
    Majority or any other organization.
        Although we are no longer a member of the consortium, I am proud to
    report to the Committee that, during our consideration of this project,
    Unocal provided much needed humanitarian assistance to the people of
    Afghanistan through our support of CARE and the Institute of Afghan
    Studies of the University of Nebraska. Their carefully designed
    projects provided basic skills training and education for men and
    women, as well as community-managed home schools, school supplies and
    teacher training for both boys and girls. Through the Red Cross and the
    United Nations, Unocal also contributed relief assistance to the
    victims of the 1998 earthquakes that devastated northern Afghanistan.
        I hope this letter will serve to correct the record. If you or your
    staff have any questions or need additional information, please do not
    hesitate to contact me.
                Sincerely,

                                             J. William Ichord,
                                     Vice President, Washington Office.

        Senator McConnell. We are disappointed she could not be
    here because she has been a persuasive advocate in the national
    campaign to focus on attention on the Taliban's war against
    women, but her testimony will certainly add to the discussion.
        Senator Leahy. Mr. Chairman, could I just make a comment?
        Senator McConnell. Yes.
        Senator Leahy. I, unfortunately, as oft happens, have to
    leave at this point. I just want to note for the record that
    normally I just slip out of here, but I have so much respect
    for the two witnesses who are about to testify. I wanted them
    to understand why I was leaving. I think the book is superb. I
    think your work is. You might feel a little bit like Sisyphus
    pushing the rock. Do not stop because it is your kind of
    concern, expertise, and conscience that makes sure the rest of
    us keep going. Thank you.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator Leahy.

                       summary statement of zohra rasekh

        It is my understanding from staff that only Ms. Rasekh will
    be speaking. So, we will be happy to hear from you at this
    point and then we will pose questions to both of you.
        Ms. Rasekh. Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, I am very
    grateful for having this opportunity to present some of my
    findings on the status of health and human rights of women in
    Afghanistan under the Taliban regime.
        During my 3-month stay in Afghanistan and in Pakistan back
    in January of 1998 and also last week, which I spent about 2
    weeks in Pakistan refugee camps, I interviewed many women. Last
    year I interviewed over 200 women from all walks of life and
    all ages, and it is very important to mention that 98 percent
    of all of these women that I interviewed disagreed with the
    Taliban policies on women and girls and also other policies.
        Some women preferred the bombing and shelling of the city
    rather than living under the Taliban regime. A former teacher
    who was forced to go door to door and beg for food and money
    for her children told me: ``A rocket attack may kill the entire
    family at once, but this is a slow death which is more
    painful.''
        For 3 months during this mission, day after day, I did not
    hear a woman happy. I did not hear a woman laughing. All I
    heard was the desperate voices lamenting and pleading for help.
    Those voices have not left me since my return from Afghanistan
    last year and also the visit that I made last week.
        As a health and human rights advocate, I believe further
    delay in stopping the Taliban violations of human rights
    against women and children of Afghanistan, and not to mention
    men, would lead to the death of the entire population. In
    addition, such abuses would spread in other parts of the world
    as it already has spread in Pakistan among refugees and also
    Pakistani citizens.
        Without further delay, let me turn to some slides that I
    prepared to show you which I photographed during my visit in
    Afghanistan and in Pakistan both from my trip last week and
    from last year. It is worthwhile to mention that taking these
    photographs was not something easy. I took the photographs with
    a great risk and also in a clandestine manner. So, I hope the
    selection that I have made would be representing some of the
    suffering and problems of the women both in Afghanistan and in
    Pakistan refugee camps and cities. Thank you.
        Senator McConnell. So, did you have an especially small
    camera or something like that?
        Ms. Rasekh. Actually, no. I had a bigger camera with a
    bigger lens, and that made my work difficult. Some of these
    photos that you will see taken outside have been taken in a
    situation where I have to look around and see nobody was
    watching, but mostly the inside photos were taken with consent
    of the people that I took their photographs, literally taking a
    life-threatening risk.
        Ms. Burkhalter. She asked us to buy her a little, tiny spy
    camera, but we have not yet come up with the money to buy one
    that size. [Laughter.]
        Senator McConnell. Now, the location of this was where?
        Ms. Rasekh. The City of Kabul and also Pakistan, both
    Peshawar and Islamabad cities.
        As it has been mentioned over and over, the extreme poverty
    has forced families to beg, especially women and widows who
    have no other way of supporting themselves because their jobs
    have been taken away from them. Even in the case of families
    who have male relatives, the job market for men is also down,
    and there are no jobs basically for 90 percent of the
    population in Kabul city. So, people basically beg in order to
    survive.
        This is a group of women sitting in front of one of the
    NGO's at the time I was in Kabul. This is May of 1998. The
    international non-governmental organizations were still in
    Kabul and you would see women covered in burqa outside, hoping
    that somebody will take notice of them and list their name for
    assistance.
        This is a former teacher who is now out begging. She has
    six children, a widow, and is forced to beg on the streets of
    Kabul.
        Abuse of women, including physically challenged women, is
    common. This is a widow, a mother of six children again, living
    in a refugee camp in Pakistan. As you can see, she has lost her
    left leg in a rocket attack in Kabul. Her husband died also in
    a rocket attack. And she was beaten twice in Kabul as she was
    trying to get inside a public building through a men-only
    designated entrance. Because of her disability, she was not
    able to go all the way to the back of the building to enter the
    building, and she was caught. She was beaten severely, and in
    addition she was put in jail for 2 days. This woman was
    severely depressed and suicidal.
        The woman in black cover is a physician. She was also
    beaten because she went to her office and visited her patients
    after Taliban forbade women from working, and especially
    medical workers were under a lot of pressure for not being able
    to treat their patients. As you know, female doctors are very
    limited and they are not allowed to work in a lot of hospitals
    and their own clinics.
        And male doctors are not allowed to treat women without a
    male relative. A lot of the widows who have no male relative
    are in this catch 22 situation that they cannot see a doctor.
    Even those who have a male relative have to get their treatment
    through the male relative. The doctor will talk to the husband
    or father or brother and treat them through communicating
    through the male relative which ends up with a lot of
    misdiagnoses of women who have severe problems.
        Land mine education, among other types of education for
    women and girls, is forbidden. Past age 8, women are not
    allowed to go to school and land mine education is included in
    that.
        This young woman, 11-year-old, had just stepped over a land
    mine a week before I took this photo and she had lost her leg.
        I apologize for this bad slide. This is a man crying who
    lost his wife. His wife was shot and killed in Kabul because
    she was teaching young girls at home. She was among several
    other women who had home-based education for young girls. She
    was threatened several times. She did not listen and one day
    Taliban barged into her home and shot her in front of her
    husband and in front of 40 young women who were her students
    and also her 1-and-a-half-year-old child who you see in this
    picture. She was crying nonstop and asking for her mother as I
    took this photo.
        The situation of new arrival refugees in Pakistan is
    horrendous. One of the camps that I visited in Peshawar had
    thousands of new refugees who were not assisted at all. They
    were waiting for months and especially women who had no male
    relatives, who had no way of going out to get food for their
    children.
        This young woman with her three children came from the City
    of Mazar-i-Sharif right after the massacre. She has made her
    own tent from plastic sheets and she lives under that tent. I
    got inside the tent. It was so hot. This was just last week.
    The weather is getting warmer and hotter in the next several
    months, and in the summertime it is intolerable for the
    children to live in this condition. But they do not receive any
    type of assistance whatsoever.
        The situation of clinics for women is so bad, although
    there are a few clinics and hospitals open for women in the
    City of Kabul. At the time I was in Kabul last year, I had the
    opportunity to go to a few clinics for women, and I had this
    shot. This is an operating room, and you can see the condition.
    The tank is the only running water in this room, extremely
    poor, no hygiene, and no proper equipment whatsoever in this
    room for women. If you can compare the condition of clinics
    between male and female hospitals and clinics, there is a huge
    difference.
        This is again another shot of an operating room for women.
        Abuse of Afghan refugees in Pakistan is extreme. Taliban
    have influence in some refugee camps in Pakistan. However, the
    Pakistani authorities, the police, are abusing Afghan refugees,
    especially men and young women.
        This young lady at age 10--2 years ago--was shot in her eye
    by a Pakistani neighbor. Nobody investigated. Nobody did
    anything. She lost her vision. Cases like this happen a lot in
    Pakistan.

                              prepared statements

        This is a little girl in Kabul wearing her mother's burqa
    practicing for her years to come to wear that head-to-toe
    cover. I happened to pass by this area and saw her, and I
    thought that was really cute. I took that shot as I was driving
    away.
        That is the end of the slides. Thank you.
         [The statements follow:]
            Prepared Statement of Zohra Raselkh and Holly Burkhalter
        Thank you for holding this important hearing on women in
    Afghanistan, Chairman McConnell, and for inviting Physicians for Human
    Rights to testify. It is an honor. We wish to present this joint
    written statement for the hearing record, and will highlight various
    aspects of it in tour oral testimony before the Subcommittee.
        As you know, Mr. Chairman. Physicians for Human Rights conducted a
    major study of the health and human rights implications of the
    Taliban's severe discrimination against women in Afghanistan. Ms. Zohra
    Rasekh a public health specialist, administered an in-depth, face-to-
    face health survey to 160 Afghan women from all ethnic groups and walks
    of life. Half of them were in Kabul, the other half had newly arrived
    in Pakistan. Her findings and the follow-up interviews she conducted
    last week with newly arrived Afghan refugee women in Pakistan make it
    clear that the Taliban's extraordinary repression of women and girls,
    which has no precedent in Afghan history or anywhere else in the world,
    has had life-threatening consequences for them.
        The story of the Taliban's destruction of women's health and human
    rights in Kabul began with its takeover of the city in September of
    1996. The regime's first official act was to make it mandatory for all
    women to wear a shroud-like garment called a burqa (which covers every
    inch of their skin and includes thick mesh cloth over the eyes), to
    prohibit women from working, girls under eight years old from going to
    school, or females from moving about without an immediate male family
    member as an escort.
        But nowhere was the Taliban's gross discrimination against women
    more apparent than in the regulations it promulgated and enforced on
    access to health care. In January 1997, Taliban officials announced
    that hospitals would be segregated by gender; in September of that
    year, the Ministry of Public Health ordered all hospitals in Kabul to
    suspend medical services for women. Female medical workers were banned
    from working in the city's 22 hospitals, and the temporary Rabia Balkhi
    structure (a 35-bed facility with no clean water, electricity, surgical
    equipment, X-ray machines, suction, or oxygen) was designated the sole
    ``hospital'' for women. Women were permitted to use a squalid maternity
    hospital which lacked all medical amenities, and, following an
    international outcry over its segregation of hospitals, the Taliban
    opened a few beds in several of the men-only facilities in the city.
        The Taliban's prohibition on women working means that women doctors
    and nurses have been summarily fired, but male doctors and clinicians
    have been prohibited from providing appropriate care to women. Thus
    women may not even venture forth to seek medical attention unless they
    are shrouded in a burqa and accompanied by a close male relative. Even
    if they can find a male physician who will agree to see them, he in
    most cases may not examine the woman or even speak to her directly
    about her health problem. Her male chaperone will describe the woman's
    illness, and the physician will likely proscribe medication.
        The health consequences of such policies are dramatic. An alarming
    71 percent of participants reported a decline in their health over the
    past two years. A majority of respondents (77 percent) reported poor
    access to health care services and an additional 20 percent reported
    that they have no access at all. Some 53 percent of the women described
    occasions in which they were seriously ill and unable to seek medical
    care. An Afghan physician described declining nutrition in children, an
    increasing rate of tuberculosis, and a high prevalence of other
    infectious diseases among women.
        Ms. Rasekh interviewed a dentist and asked how he would examine a
    patient. At first, he denied that he would provide service at all to a
    woman. But once he thought it safe to admit it, the dentist indicated
    that he would post a lookout outside his office before lifting the
    burqa from a woman's face so he could examine her teeth. When asked
    what would happen if he was caught by the Taliban religious police, the
    dentist said that both he and his patient would be beaten and jailed,
    and his office would be closed.
        Ms. Rasekh's interviews with newly arrived refugees in Pakistan
    last week indicate that the perilous situation for women with regard to
    access to health care has actually worsened over the past year. As you
    know, the Taliban is very hostile to humanitarian nongovernmental
    organizations and last July issued an edict that all foreign workers
    must be housed at the bombed-out Polytechnic campus on the outskirts of
    Kabul, which lacked electricity and running water. Almost every
    international humanitarian organization left Afghanistan when the
    Taliban made it clear that those which didn't relocate to the
    Polytechnic would be expelled. Following the U.S. bombing of Bin
    Laden's terrorist camps in Afghanistan last August, the U.N. and most
    remaining humanitarian ngo's departed the country. Their departure
    meant the end of the maternal and child health clinics they had run
    which had been open to women and their children, which were the only
    facilities available to them.
        Ms. Rasekh conducted a number of interviews with women whose girl
    children had died when they were turned away from ``men-only''
    hospitals. She also met a woman who did not take her twenty-year old
    daughter to seek medical care because the women did not own the
    required burqa, had no male relatives to accompany them, and were
    terrified to venture out onto the streets in search of help for fear
    that they would be beaten by the religious police. The girl, who had
    suffered from abdominal pain for many days, died.
        It is not the case that every woman who shows an inch of skin is
    beaten every time she leaves her home. But such beatings are so
    frequent that few women wish to test their luck. Ms. Rasekh herself,
    who, traveling last year in Kabul as a foreigner, did not wear a burqa
    but did wear a head scarf and clothing that covered her completely,
    narrowly escaped a beating by a Taliban militant brandishing a whip
    because she had pushed her sleeve up a few inches, and he saw her
    exposed wrist. Women are whipped and beaten for other infractions, as
    well. Ms. Rasekh took testimony from one women who was beaten badly
    because she had purchased ice cream from a street vendor and was eating
    it in public; the vender was beaten and jailed for selling ice cream to
    an unchaperoned woman. Children are not permitted to play with toys
    outdoors, and kite-flying, once a very popular childhood pursuit, has
    been banned.
        Interviews conducted by Ms. Rasekh last week in Pakistan indicate
    that the Taliban's severe dress code restrictions on women have
    actually worsened. The religious policemen and militants who patrol the
    city searching for women to beat bring with them little boys or old
    men. If they see a woman whose trouser legs or skirt is too wide, the
    boy will lie on the ground and report if he can see the woman's limbs
    under the garment. The woman then faces a beating or arrest if the
    folds of her clothing expose her limbs, even if the fabric reaches the
    ground.\1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Dress code restrictions are imposed on men, too, and the
    penalties are very abusive for infractions. Men must wear their beard a
    certain length, and within the last several months the Taliban has
    begun enforcing the requirement that men's trousers be short and expose
    the ankles. Leather jackets are now banned, and if men wear them the
    garment will be confiscated and the wearer will be beaten and/or
    arrested.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Taliban's restrictions on women's education have made women and
    girls uniquely vulnerable to the scourge of landmines, which litter
    Kabul and the rest of Afghanistan. (Our 1998 survey showed that a
    shocking 16 percent of those interviewed had had an immediate relative
    killed by a landmine.) The Taliban places restrictions on the
    participation on girls and women in landmines awareness and education
    classes. Save the Children, for example, formerly conducted mine
    awareness classes in Kabul that were attended by some 400 boys and
    girls every month. The Taliban prohibited girls from attending with
    boys, indicating that the humanitarian organization could provide
    education to them once they had been injured and arrived at the
    hospital. Save the Children closed its program altogether. The United
    Nations has reported that landmine casualties among women and girls
    have risen.
        Not surprisingly, participants in the PHR survey reported
    extraordinarily high levels of mental stress and depression. 81 percent
    reported a decline in their mental condition; 42 percent met the
    diagnostic criteria for Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (42 percent) and
    major depression (97 percent) and also demonstrated significant
    symptoms of anxiety (86 percent). 21 percent of the participants
    indicated that they had suicidal thoughts ``extremely often,'' or
    ``quite often.''
        These shocking mental health statistics are explained by women's
    depression and anxiety over their enforced segregation, their denial of
    the right to work, and their inability to receive medical care. Women
    interviewed by PHR noted that they were profoundly depressed by the
    prohibition on their girls' attending school, which ended their hopes
    that their children might have a better life. And the high anxiety the
    women expressed was based upon their realistic fears that they might be
    subjected to human rights abuses by the Taliban authorities, usually
    for dress code violations or for walking without a male chaperone. An
    extraordinary 68 percent of survey respondents reported that they or a
    family member had been detained in Kabul by Taliban religious police or
    security forces. 54 percent of those detentions resulted in beatings,
    and 21 percent in torture.
        Ms. Rasekh obtained extremely distressing testimony last week from
    the husband of a woman who defied the Taliban's orders and continued to
    teach girls and young women in her home. The Taliban ordered her
    several times to close the school, and she refused. Then approximately
    a year ago, seven or eight armed men entered their home, beat the woman
    and her husband and again ordered her to close the school. The woman
    teacher stood up to the Taliban, denounced them, and insisted that she
    would continue to teach. The armed men struck her with a rifle butt
    then, in front of her terrified students, husband, and baby daughter,
    killed her with shots through the head and stomach.
        The Taliban's practice of summoning Kabul residents to witness the
    carrying out of Sha'ria (Islamic law) punishments handed down by its
    Kangaroo courts, including beheadings, floggings, amputation of limbs,
    stoning, collapsing walls, and hangings, further traumatize the
    population, including children. Women interviewed by PHR's Zohra Rasekh
    told her they have difficulty forgetting past trauma (including
    terrible suffering during the Soviet occupation, injuries from mortars,
    rockets, and landmines during years of civil war in the mid-1990's, and
    the insecurity of theft, murder and rape during the breakdown of civil
    authority during the period 1992-1996.
        One of PHR's troubling findings was the impoverishment suffered by
    families (particularly those headed by widows, who are said to number
    between 30,000 and 60,000 in Kabul alone) as a result of the Taliban's
    prohibition on women working. Women who once held good jobs as
    teachers, doctors, or nurses are now on the street begging so as to
    feed the children. And the extensive humanitarian assistance provided
    to Afghanistan apparently fails to reach many of those who are most in
    need. Only 6 percent of the 160 women PHR interviewed had received any
    foreign aid at all. The Taliban's prohibition on women entering
    humanitarian groups' offices and distribution cites are part of the
    reason why.
        Since Physicians for Human Rights published its report in August
    1998, Afghanistan's agony has worsened. By the end of the summer, the
    Taliban had triumphed over its military rivals, and consolidated
    control over the remaining one third of the country. News reports
    filtering out from the cities of Mazar-i-Sharif and Bamiyan indicated
    that victorious Taliban fighters committed large scale atrocities
    against the civilian population in those cities, who are largely of a
    different ethnicity than the Taliban.
        Los Angeles Times reporter Dexter Filkins received eyewitness
    reports from refugees indicating that the Taliban killed thousands of
    unarmed ethnic minority people. Rupert Colville, spokesman for the
    Office of the U.N. High Commissioner for refugees in Islamabad, stated
    that as many as 6,000 Hazaras in the city of Mazar-i-Sharif may have
    been killed by Taliban soldiers. Colville stated: ``What the refugees
    are saying is extremely consistent, and in our view it is very
    credible. On the first day [of the Taliban's entry into Mazar-i-Sharif]
    there was a kind of frenzied killing spree of everybody and anybody who
    was on the street, including animals.'' Human Rights Watch researchers
    who interviewed refugees newly arrived from the area also obtained
    extensive testimony as to the killing of unarmed men, women, and
    children of Hazara ethnicity. She also received significant testimony
    that the Taliban routinely raped minority women.
        Afghan Refugee Women in Pakistan.--In addition to sharing our
    concerns about the suffering of women under the Taliban, PHR wishes to
    take this opportunity to share with the Subcommittee our concerns about
    the condition of Afghan refugees in Pakistan. As you know, Pakistan is
    home to the largest refugee population in the world, and many Afghan
    refugees have been in Pakistan for twenty years. The UNHCR, operating
    through the Pakistani Commission for Afghan Refugees (CAR) provides
    some services to the refugees (notably health, education, and water)
    and numerous humanitarian ego's operate in the camps. The UNHCR is not
    set up to provide extensive assistance to new arrivals.
        When Ms. Rasekh visited Peshawar camp last Spring, she found that
    many new arrivals from Afghanistan had received no services whatsoever.
    They had no idea what services were available to them, or where to get
    them. And both long-term refugees and newcomers are preyed upon by the
    Pakistani police (including the CAR's own police force), and required
    to bribe local CAR officials to get on aid distribution lists.
        Human Rights Watch's Women's Rights Project identified exactly the
    same problems during that organization's investigation of the Afghan
    refugee situation last July, and Ms. Rasekh found that the situation
    remained unchanged when she visited refugee camps in Pakistan last
    week. Specifically, Akora camp, which is extremely overcrowded, holding
    some 4,000 families, had hundreds of new arrivals coming every day who
    were provided with nothing and were in extremely poor condition.
    According to newly arrived refugee women she talked with, the camp did
    not even have latrines. If newly arrived refugees get anything at all--
    and most don't--it is limited to a piece of plastic sheet to sleep
    under and a day or week's rations of flour and oil.
        Moreover, UNHCR assistance that is provided only in refugee
    villages (not to the refugees who go to the cities) and is limited to a
    handful of under-supplied health clinics and overcrowded schools. In
    Akora camp, for example, the single school facility was bursting at the
    seams with approximately one hundred children--a very small proportion
    of the thousands of eligible children in the camp. And the Basic Health
    Units within Akora and other camps are extremely limited, with health
    providers largely limiting their treatment to prescribing medications
    or procedures elsewhere that the refugees cannot afford to pay for.
    Almost all of the women Ms. Rasekh interviewed recently complained of
    gynecological problems and indicated that there was nothing for them in
    the UNHCR basic health units.
        The UNHCR is well aware of the unmet need among new arrivals and
    reports that it is undertaking some new ways getting emergency aid to
    them by having humanitarian ego's take the assistance directly to the
    arrivals, as opposed to setting up structures that might be exploited
    by longer-term refugees.\2\ But it is important to note that UNHCR's
    programs in Afghanistan are severely under funded. The donor community
    apparently believes that it is safe for Afghans to return home (and
    hundreds of thousands have done so over the past several years) but new
    refugees are nonetheless arriving every day, particularly women and
    their dependent children and ethnic minorities who are fleeing the
    Taliban. Appropriate new structures cannot be put in place to address
    their needs, or to service the long-term refugees either, unless the
    effort is funded. UNHCR reports that last year, it received less than
    50 percent of its funding needs for Afghan refugees. This year, they
    have received nothing so far in response to their annual appeal and are
    funding their activities from reserves.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ UNHCR indicates that one of the largest difficulties in meeting
    the needs of newly arriving refugees is that if the agency sets up
    reception centers or other form of targeted assistance, they are
    inundated by waves of long-term refugees, posing as new arrivals.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Physicians for Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, and others have
    raised with the UNHCR our concerns that women are not safe within the
    camps. They have received extensive testimony of abuses such as rape,
    theft, or threats by the Pakistani police themselves. PHR has received
    reports by that the Taliban, which easily moves back and forth across
    the border, also threatens and abuses both men and women, particularly
    those known to be critical or active on human rights or women's
    education. UNHCR is well aware of the problem, but has indicated that
    little protection can be counted on for the refugees from the local
    police and that the answer to the problem is to resettle those at risk
    in a third country. UNHCR has in the course of the past year addressed
    51 such security cases, relocating a total of 297 people. However, this
    ``at risk'' program is limited and it is extremely slow. For example,
    we are aware of several women who have received threats from the
    Taliban who were to have been interviewed by a representative from the
    U.S. Immigration Service in February. The U.S. representative postponed
    the visit until an undetermined time next month. UNHCR officials
    concern to PHR's representative that they are expected to provide
    protection and relocation, but that third countries are not moving
    swiftly to interview and accept those at risk. UNHCR has also indicated
    that there are not enough slots within country quotas to accept all
    those who are at risk.
        Not only is this ``at risk'' program inadequate, it is not a
    substitute for there being genuine security for the refugees, both
    within and outside the camps. Clearly, UNHCR has not been successful in
    appealing to the authorities for appropriate and professional policing
    and investigation of abuses by the police and prosecution of those
    responsible. The United States and other donor governments should
    engage directly with the Government of Pakistan, and firmly protest its
    authorities' exploitation and abuse of vulnerable Afghan refugees. They
    should demand that the Government of Pakistan conduct a thorough
    investigation of the conduct of its police forces towards the refugee
    community, and take immediate steps to replace local commanders with
    professionals. They should also address the substantial increase of
    politically and religiously motivated terror campaigns aimed at the
    Taliban's political opponents. While Ms. Rasekh was in Pakistan, she
    learned of the shooting death of an Afghan refugee whose son is in the
    U.S. and has been associated with anti-Taliban political activities
    here.
        The UNHCR, for its part, could help the process by setting up
    ombudsman's offices within the refugee camps where victims can safely
    go to report abuses. The UNHCR can then, with the support of
    influential governments such as the U.S., take these cases directly to
    the authorities for investigation, removal of the offending local
    police, or other action to bring abuses to an end.
        Recommendations for U.S. Policy.--Mr. Chairman, the Taliban's human
    rights record, its imposition of its own interpretation of Islam which
    has no precedent within Afghanistan or anywhere else in the world, its
    harboring of the terrorist Bin Laden, its refusal to negotiate with
    other groups, and its heavy involvement in narcotics production and
    trafficking have left it with few friends around the world. The U.S.,
    after appearing to welcome the Taliban after it took over Kabul in
    1996, appears to have changed course and has for the past several years
    been a severe critic of the regime. First Lady Hillary Clinton
    highlighted the plight of Afghan women during a December 10 speech at
    the White House and last week at a United Nations conference on women.
    State Department officials regularly raise the issue.
        There is more the U.S. and other governments could do, however. The
    Taliban is eager for international recognition, a return of United
    Nations programs and personnel to Afghanistan, and western aid and
    investment. But U.S. should not miss an opportunity to let it be known
    that no such recognition will be possible so long as the Taliban
    continues its policy of gross abuses of human rights and gender
    discrimination. The U.S. government should also make it plain that it
    does not support private investment or international bank loans to
    Afghanistan under the Taliban, even if the Taliban eventually satisfies
    the U.S. demand to turn over Bin Laden.\3\ The U.S. should urge its
    allies to adopt a similar approach.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ The U.S. has made it clear that there will be no resumption in
    relations with Afghanistan so long as the Taliban harbors Bin Laden.
    The Taliban recently reported that Bin Laden has left the country. No
    one takes the claim seriously; international reporters in the region
    report that he has been seen recently in Taliban-controlled areas of
    Afghanistan.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The U.S. and other governments can also take an important step that
    they have not taken thus far: they can publicly call upon the
    Government of Pakistan to end its support for the Taliban, to close the
    border to transport in fuel and arms, and to withdraw its significant
    military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan. As you know, the
    Taliban movement was created, schooled, and nourished in Pakistan, and
    the regime receives significant Pakistani aid. Such assistance, it has
    been reported, was crucial during the Taliban's takeover of the
    northern cities of Mazar-i-Sharif and Bamyan City last year. Saudi
    Arabia reportedly aided the Taliban as well, although the Saudis
    downgraded their relationship with the Taliban recently over the issue
    of Bin Laden. Other countries, such as Iran and Russia, should be
    pressed to end assistance to other factions.
        We also urge the U.S. to press for a thorough-going U.N.
    investigation of the Taliban's abuses against women and against ethnic
    minorities. The butchery of ethnic minorities in Mazar-i-Sharif last
    fall was so extensive that the U.N. is obliged to take the question of
    whether the Taliban was engaged in an effort to exterminate a people on
    the basis of their ethnicity--in other words, committing genocide.
        Finally, we strongly recommend that the United States and other
    donors conduct a thorough investigation of humanitarian needs of Afghan
    refugees in Pakistan. Donors should immediately provide UNHCR with its
    requested budget, and push the international agency to dramatically
    increase emergency assistance to new arrivals, as well as health care,
    education, and income-generating activities for women.
        Thank you for your attention.
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Nancy A. Aossey, President and CEO, International
                                 Medical Corps
        On behalf of International Medical Corps (IMC),\1\ I would like to
    thank you for the opportunity to submit our comments regarding the
    issue of humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan. As one of the first
    American NGOs to establish and operate humanitarian programs inside
    Afghanistan, IMC has a long history of working within the cultural and
    political constraints that exist there.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ International Medical Corps (IMC) is a U.S. nonprofit
    organization dedicated to saving lives and relieving suffering through
    health care training and medical relief programs. Established in 1984
    by volunteer United States doctors and nurses, IMC is a private,
    voluntary, nonpolitical, nonsectarian organization. Its mission is to
    improve the quality of life through health interventions and related
    activities that build local capacity in areas worldwide where few
    organizations dare to serve. By offering training and health care to
    local populations and medical assistance to people at highest risk, and
    with the flexibility to respond rapidly to emergency situations, IMC
    rehabilitates devastated health care systems and helps bring them back
    to self-reliance. IMC draws its material and financial support from
    concerned individuals, community groups, private foundations and
    corporations,--government agencies, and international organizations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Over an 11-year period, during and after the Soviet occupation of
    Afghanistan, IMC trained and graduated over 600 Afghan health workers
    from mid-level training programs held in Peshawar, Quetta, Jalalabad,
    and Kabul. With support from the U.S. Agency for International
    Development (USAID), the World Health Organization (WHO), and UNICEF,
    IMC built and staffed eight hospitals and 51 health centers dispersed
    throughout 80 percent of Afghanistan's provinces. With its specialized
    logistics capability, IMC supported all of these facilities with health
    worker supervision, drugs, equipment, and supplies. Each IMC medic
    treated at least 4,000 patients each year.
        In 1994, following an agreement with the Afghan Ministry of Public
    Health, all activities were transferred to a training hospital IMC
    constructed north of Kabul. Here, with support from the European
    Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO) and from the U.N. High
    Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), medical activities and training
    continued under the guidance of IMC's Afghan management, logistics, and
    medical teams. IMC's training hospital, which had graduated 50 women
    health professionals in the previous month, was lost to the frontlines
    of the warring factions following the take over of Kabul in September,
    1995. At this time, IMC suspended operations and evacuated the
    facility.
        Despite these setbacks, however, IMC remains one of the few relief
    organizations working in Afghanistan to have achieved its goal of
    technical self-sufficiency: in 1994, its entire operation was
    transitioned over to core local management and technical staff.
    Following, the takeover of the country by the Taliban and the
    suspension of IMC activities at the time, these staff have gone on to
    fill senior management positions with indigenous NGOs in Pakistan.
    Furthermore, the respect with which they are held as leaders in the
    medical community has led to significant support from international
    donors for these organizations' cross-border activities in Afghanistan
    as well as in the refugee camps in the North West Frontier Province of
    Pakistan.
        Despite the current political environment in Afghanistan and the
    constraints that they impose upon health care delivery, the primary
    health activities of just one of these indigenous organizations reached
    more than 200,000 patients in 31 districts with a total population of
    approximately 2.3 million in 1998; 80 percent of the patients were
    women and children and the bulk of the activities were the delivery of
    maternal, child, and reproductive health services.
        For this reason, IMC believes any strategy for humanitarian
    assistance to the vulnerable populations of Afghanistan, particularly
    its women and children, should include major elements which focus on
    the actual and potential capacity of the Afghans to address their own
    problems themselves.
        Unfortunately, the level of repression of women has reached new
    heights in Kabul under the rule of the Taliban militia authorities.
    Although IMC notes that this repression is a phenomenon of Afghan
    tribal culture that existed long before, it has severely worsened since
    the Taliban. Because cultural prejudices contribute to this repression,
    it is important that all opportunities which exist for enlightenment
    through education be seized if the phenomenon is not to exist long
    after the Taliban. The increased number of refugees in flight from the
    Taliban in Pakistan today provides an opportunity for assistance
    programs to support a wide array of training and educational inputs. In
    addition, in those numerous communities inside Afghanistan that only
    pay lip service to the edicts of whatever central authority, there
    remain numerous opportunities for the support of cross-border health
    initiatives. The high level of activities of at least one indigenous
    NGO activities bears out that, in spite of the proscriptions issued by
    the central Taliban militia authorities that prevent access to health
    care services, a considerable number of women and children can and do
    have access to community health care services with the knowledge and
    acquiescence of local authorities.
        Afghanistan continues to have one of the highest mortality rates
    for children under five-years-old in the world, a life expectancy of
    only 45 years, and a literacy rate of only 32 percent. Despite a number
    of recent studies, it is difficult to imagine the depth of the misery
    or the magnitude of the tragic plight which faces Afghan women and
    children today. This, and the vulnerability of the general population
    to hunger, weather, sickness and death provide a moral imperative for
    the continuation of assistance to Afghanistan. The political
    complexities of that country today must not be allowed to run the risk
    of becoming entwined with its social and cultural realities: meeting
    the moral imperative calls for the delivery of ``smart aid'', that is
    an aid strategy that does not serve to strengthen the central Taliban
    militia authorities, but a strategy which also does not penalize the
    poor.

                            backwardness is stunning

        Senator McConnell. The level of backwardness is just
    stunning. Surely this is not even a tolerable situation for
    most of the men. How long can a regime like this survive? There
    must surely be some popular negative reaction to such
    deplorable conditions. Do you have a view on that?
        Ms. Rasekh. Exactly men and women are equally abused.
    Unfortunately, we did not have enough time to also investigate
    the condition of men, but as I had a chance to talk to a few
    men, they are also very depressed. They are both directly and
    indirectly abused, directly because they get severe beatings,
    jailed, extortion for ethnicity reasons, for other reasons, and
    also for infraction of dress code and a variety of other
    reasons, but also indirectly by seeing their women being
    abused, being beaten in public, and not able to go out in
    public, and in the case of that young man having his wife shot
    in front of him and he has no way of defending.
        Inside Afghanistan, people cannot do anything. They are
    against armed men, in this case Taliban. They are voiceless.
    Outside in Pakistan or other neighboring countries, people have
    no voice because they are pressured by either the Pakistani
    authorities or--in other countries I have no information. I do
    not know, but in the case of Pakistan, because Pakistan
    supports Taliban, there is a great connection between the
    Pakistani intelligence and the Taliban. So, people are very
    much afraid of saying anything in that area as well. So,
    basically they are left without any voice.
        Ms. Burkhalter. Can I just add one comment to Zohra's
    remarks about security in Pakistan? I really just wanted to sit
    by her side and add a few words.
        The UNHCR has an at-risk program for resettling people who
    have been threatened in the Pakistani refugee camps, but it is
    not a very big one. They have only resettled 51 cases involving
    about 300 people. We are aware of cases of people who have been
    actually threatened by the Taliban who are going to the UNHCR
    to try to get settlement, and it is just not cranked up to meet
    the need at all.
        And the Taliban's execution of its relatives of its critics
    that it can get its hands on in those Pakistani camps are going
    up. There was a man killed while Zohra was there last week
    whose son is a political critic of the Taliban here in the
    United States and his father was killed, shot dead. These kinds
    of cases are going up and the UNHCR wants to provide
    protection. It is their mandate to do so, but they really do
    not have the resources to do it.
        I think that one of the resources that they need are for
    governments such as our own to engage with the Pakistanis
    directly on these security questions. The Pakistani police are
    themselves corrupt and abusive and they are not in any way
    controlling the Taliban's access to its perceived critics in
    those camps. The people are scared to death.
        Senator McConnell. We are going to end this century in
    about 9 months. What percentage of the population by the end of
    the year do you estimate will have no education at all? Do you
    have an estimate of how many of the population will have no
    education at all?
        Ms. Rasekh. I do not have any estimate since there are no
    numbers. I would say the way things are going, the majority of
    Afghan people both inside Afghanistan and outside have not gone
    beyond elementary education. In refugee camps for Afghan
    families who leave Afghanistan in the hope that they can get
    some education for their children, they can only go up to sixth
    grade, both girls and boys, because there is no funding.
    Therefore, there is no program for kids to go beyond elementary
    years.
        Inside Afghanistan under the control of Taliban, of course
    girls are not allowed to go to school, and boys' education has
    been affected as well since about 70 percent of the teachers
    were women. Because of the lack of teachers in schools, boys
    are also not getting proper education. So, therefore, the
    majority of Afghans by the end of this century will be
    illiterate if the situation continues to stay the way it is
    today.
        Senator McConnell. The United States always wants to do
    something about every problem, and we would certainly like to
    have an impact on this one. I gather from what you said, Ms.
    Burkhalter, the most important thing we could do is pressure
    the Pakistanis. Is that right?
        Ms. Burkhalter. I think so. I actually thought that
    Secretary Inderfurth's testimony certainly went further than
    the last time I heard him testify about 6 months ago. I think
    that the United States needs to be more direct about the need
    for the Pakistanis to withdraw their intelligence and military
    personnel. Zohra knows exactly where the Pakistani intelligence
    headquarters are in Kabul. It is widely known and it is not a
    secret.
        What is more, there were important reports--we do not
    investigate such matters ourselves, but we read news reports
    that Pakistani soldiers or militia and others were actually
    assisting the Taliban in its takeover of the north last fall.
    That is a matter for real concern since the takeover of Mazar,
    Bamian City and other northern cities was characterized by such
    gross bloodletting of minority people and a lot of rape of
    minority women before they were killed or in the context of the
    mass killing of upwards of 8,000 people in 2 days. The actual
    involvement of Pakistan in the Taliban's conquest of some of
    those cities really should be a matter of high concern.
        Again, we do not report on such military developments
    ourselves, but we read news reports of same. Why they do not
    speak more plainly about the need for Pakistan to withdraw its
    military personnel--and I understand about the porous border
    and the difficulty of stopping the flow of the private
    commercial transport in arms and fuel. We are well aware that
    it is a big arms bazaar in that area. Nonetheless, Pakistan
    could at least announce a policy that it was prohibiting the
    flow of arms and it could investigate its own military and
    security personnel who are involved in arms trafficking with
    the Taliban. I see none of that and I do not hear the
    administration calling for it either.
        Senator McConnell. If the Pakistanis and the Saudis were to
    change policy, how much of an impact would that have?
        Ms. Rasekh. Well, that will slow down Taliban from
    advancing because basically they receive their military,
    diplomatic, and financial support from both countries,
    especially Pakistan, and without that, they are not going to
    last long. So, that will bring them to their senses to sit down
    in a peace talk with their opposition and solve this problem.
        Senator McConnell. The obvious conclusion to reach I guess
    in answering questions about Pakistanis and the Saudis is that
    they fear this brand of fundamentalism. Is that essentially
    what you think drives their policy of support for this regime,
    that they feel they may be next?
        Ms. Burkhalter. I am not sure that I would characterize it
    quite like that. As I understand it, Pakistani support for the
    Taliban is as much unofficial as it is official. It is
    official, but the Pakistanis have their own strong, as you
    know, political, religious trends in Pakistan that are strong
    supporters of the Taliban, and it is a vulnerable government.
    It is not a strong government. The support for the Taliban
    comes from a whole variety of elements of Pakistani society.
    Some people think that the Taliban has more influence in
    Pakistan than vice versa. I do not happen to subscribe to that.
        But it is I think too much to say that Pakistan can simply
    turn off the Taliban. I do not believe that is the case. Not
    now. It might have been 2 years ago.
        But I do think that there is no evidence that the
    Pakistanis are taking action against either official or
    unofficial support. There is the transport mafia. There is
    Islamic fundamentalist political parties within Pakistan, the
    Pakistani----
        Senator McConnell. That is an extraordinarily dismal
    assessment you just gave. Our ability to impact the policy of
    the Pakistan Government, if it is that sympathetic across the
    board within their society, is very limited. Right?
        Ms. Burkhalter. I do not know about that. It may be limited
    because we do not have a big aid relationship with Pakistan now
    for obvious reasons, because of the nuclear testing.
        Senator McConnell. Right.
        Ms. Burkhalter. But I would not say U.S. influence with
    Pakistan is extraordinarily limited. I think that the
    Pakistanis should be called upon to do what they can do. They
    will not be able to stop everything because there is this
    significant, sort of privatized foreign policy that
    characterizes Pakistan.
        Senator McConnell. Yes, but you were just saying there are
    all elements of Pakistani society who basically support the----
        Ms. Burkhalter. No, no. I misspoke. I did not mean all
    elements of Pakistani support the Taliban. I meant that some
    important elements, including Islamic fundamentalists,
    Pakistani political parties, politicians, some of the religious
    establishment, the transport mafia, drug traffickers within
    Pakistan--there is a wide network both private and official
    that support the Taliban. But as Mr. Inderfurth suggested
    Pakistan----
        Senator McConnell. Would those elements like to see
    Pakistan establish a system like Afghanistan?
        Ms. Burkhalter. Some within Pakistan, indeed. There are
    very close ties between----
        Senator McConnell. Then maybe my original question is the
    point. My question was, is this policy driven by a fear that
    they may be next?
        Ms. Rasekh. If I may, the religious groups may want the
    same form of government in Pakistan. However, other groups such
    as business people who are involved with drug trafficking and
    other business in Afghanistan, oil, their interest is purely
    financial. The Government of Pakistan has more than just the
    one or two issues involved in Afghanistan. Their involvement in
    Afghanistan goes way beyond the Soviet invasion and even before
    that. So, there is a lot of interest that one can talk about
    about the involvement of Pakistan.
        There is no time to go over it here, but Pakistani
    involvement in Afghanistan has been going on for many, many
    years. They were supporting mainly a Pashtun group before
    Taliban, another group, the Hikmetiar group who nonstop
    targeted Kabul before Taliban and rocketed the city and killed
    thousands of people. Since he did not succeed at the time, then
    Taliban was created for the purpose of supporting another
    Pashtun group over other minorities. It is a complex issue of
    Pakistan involvement.
        Senator McConnell. This level of backwardness is stunning,
    just stunning in 1999 with the proliferation of information,
    democracies springing up all over the world, much of it
    assisted by the United States.
        I guess as someone heavily involved in developing our
    assistance program every year, I come back to the question of
    what can we do. Now, I heard you say influence the Pakistani
    Government as much as we can to change its policy and influence
    the Saudi Government as much as we can to change its policy. In
    terms of assistance, what more can we do? And can it be
    channeled in such a way that is actually beneficial, or is
    anything we do likely to be kind of co-opted by the regime and
    diverted in some other direction? How do we help more than we
    are?
        Ms. Burkhalter. Just a word about aid to Afghanistan
    itself. There were significant aid programs and they do
    continue at a reduced level, as Ms. Taft mentioned. One of the
    most troubling findings that Zohra came back with to us was
    that only 6 percent of her very large random sample of women
    that she interviewed, either new arrivals who had just come out
    of Afghanistan and were in Pakistan or women in Kabul
    themselves, only 6 percent of some 200 women had ever had a
    drop of assistance. That was most frequently the subsidized
    bread. But we cannot generalize from that that only 6 percent
    of the entire population was getting aid, but it is a troubling
    statistic that so few of the women she interviewed, selected
    randomly in both countries, had had any contact whatsoever with
    humanitarian assistance, considering how large those programs
    are.
        Part of the reason why was that the Taliban does not permit
    women themselves to go get that aid. Women, to get assistance,
    have to get on the rolls which are maintained by Taliban
    officials in local neighborhoods. If they do not get themselves
    on those rolls or they cannot pay a bribe or what have you,
    they are not going to get the aid.
        So, even when the U.N. goes back in, they need to do a
    dramatically better job of monitoring the provision of its
    program and insisting on some direct access to women either by
    using women staff or by setting up facilities that only women
    can use. I hate to concede a discriminatory, segregated
    situation, but those women had nothing. They are not going to
    make it. The aid programs are not working within Afghanistan
    even when they were at their height before the Taliban kicked
    all the aid workers out.
        So, it is a very tall order. We do not really know how the
    West can sort of overwhelm the Taliban's gender restrictions.
    The U.N.'s memorandum of understanding was the wrong way to go
    about it, I might add, and Mr. Leahy had that exactly correct.
        But I think right now the best way to reach Afghan women
    are those in Pakistan and lots more has to be done. They are
    geared down, as Julia Taft mentioned, and the United States and
    other donors need to get into a framework that these people
    cannot go back. And there are new arrivals coming every day,
    and they need to put in secondary education, much more
    assistance for newcomers, many more health clinics. NGO's and
    the UNHCR and others that are maintaining health clinics could
    start by hiring Afghan women doctors and nurses. They are
    there. They need the money. They need the work.
        Senator McConnell. So, if I am hearing you correctly, the
    answer is do a dramatically better job of taking care of the
    Afghanis who are in Pakistan and that there is probably no
    effective way at the moment to avoid thievery and other
    problems in getting assistance directly into Afghanistan. In
    other words, take care of the Afghan population that is outside
    of Afghanistan as best we can in the hopes that some day they
    will go back and they will be educated and reasonably healthy?
    Is that what I am hearing?
        Ms. Burkhalter. I would not write off humanitarian
    assistance to Afghanistan, particularly once the U.N. gets its
    act together in terms of security. I do think the U.N. needs to
    do a better job and can. We urge the U.N. to itself carry out
    monitoring of who is getting the aid and engage the Taliban on
    that, on questions of aid access alone in ways that they have
    not done. Some of the NGO's do a pretty good job, but the U.N.
    I think has done a poor job in that regard. When they go back
    in, that would be a way to start. They cannot overwhelm the
    Taliban but they can do better than they have done.
        Senator McConnell. We are going to have to wrap up. Ms.
    Rasekh, any final thoughts?
        Ms. Rasekh. I wanted to mention about the aid to refugees,
    especially in Pakistan. If that is somehow arranged to go
    directly from UNHCR to the refugees rather than going through
    the Pakistani Government, through the Pakistani Commission for
    Afghan Refugees, that would be much better than going through
    that system because a lot of money is lost. There is corruption
    within the Pakistani Commission for Afghan Refugees, and a
    large portion of the aid has disappeared before it reaches the
    real needy people. I got a lot of complaints from refugees who
    had been in the camps and never received any kind of
    assistance, and they knew how the assistance was divided among
    the employees and workers who work for the commission. If there
    is any way that UNHCR can avoid going through the Pakistani
    Commission for Afghan Refugees and directly assist the
    refugees, that would be much better.
        Also, an emphasis on the education and access to health
    care for refugees, there is very limited or almost nothing, as
    I mentioned before, beyond elementary school education and very
    basic health care for women, especially women who need
    reproductive health assistance. There is nothing there. There
    is a huge need for some new clinics in the refugee camp areas
    and also in the cities where most educated, intellectual people
    live in the cities, and they have no way of getting any kind of
    assistance because they are not considered refugees.
    Historically Afghan refugees in Pakistan have not been
    registered as refugees and they never receive any kind of
    assistance unless they live in the refugee camps or villages,
    which they will receive some type of medical and education
    services which is also very limited.
        Also, vulnerable women and women at risk who have been
    threatened by Taliban have a limitation in getting outside or
    getting resettled in third countries. UNHCR had a concern that
    there is not enough quota or enough spots for these women to
    get out of Pakistan and go to a third country. An increase in
    that would help a lot of these families who are at risk.

                              subcommittee recess

        Senator McConnell. Well, I want to thank you again for your
    courage and for all the efforts you are making to enlighten the
    rest of the world about this dreadful regime, and I thank you
    both for being here today.
        The subcommittee will stand in recess until 10:30 a.m., on
    Thursday March 25, when we will hear testimony from Mark
    Richard, Deputy Assistant Attorney General of the Criminal
    Division, Department of Justice and Martin S. Indyk, Assistant
    Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, Department of
    State; and other nondepartmental witnesses.
        [Whereupon, at 4:06 p.m., Tuesday, March 9, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10:30 a.m.,
    Thursday, March 25.]

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, MARCH 25, 1999

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mitch McConnell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators McConnell, Specter, Stevens, and
    Lautenberg.

                             DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

    STATEMENT OF HON. MARK M. RICHARD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT
                ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE CRIMINAL DIVISION

                              DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    STATEMENT OF HON. MARTIN S. INDYK, ASSISTANT SECRETARY
                OF STATE FOR NEAR EASTERN AFFAIRS

                 opening statement of senator mitch mc connell

        Senator McConnell. This hearing today is being held at the
    request of Senator Arlen Specter. As the subcommittee proceeds
    with consideration of the administration's substantial request
    to meet commitments made at the Wye Plantation, congressional
    emphasis must be on how the assistance advances America's and
    our regional partners' interests in security and stability.
    Today we will focus on the Palestinian piece of the package.
        The Oslo Accords and subsequent agreements negotiated by
    the administration spell out specific obligations undertaken by
    the Palestinian Authority. In reviewing the $400 million
    request for the Palestinians, we must consider whether they
    have met these key obligations, including developing and
    sharing a plan to collect illegal weapons, reducing the size of
    security forces, and cooperating with Israeli and U.S.
    authorities on cases involving terrorism, especially when
    Americans are the victims.
        As I indicated, my colleague Senator Specter will be
    presiding over this hearing. I thank him for suggesting that we
    do this, and I now turn the chair over to Senator Specter.

                   opening statement of senator arlen specter

        Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Senator McConnell,
    for convening this hearing in your capacity as chairman of the
    Foreign Operations Subcommittee of Appropriations.
        The issues outlined by Chairman McConnell are matters of
    great importance as they relate to the appropriations bill
    which will be coming out of this subcommittee. During my
    service on the subcommittee since I was elected to the Senate,
    I found the work enormously important. It is a very small share
    of the total Federal budget but a very, very important part,
    and the aspect of how responses are made to the issue of
    terrorism is one of enormous importance as we evaluate the
    allocations to the Palestinian Authority in the upcoming fiscal
    year.
        This issue came into sharp focus for me in December when I
    accompanied President Clinton on his trip to Israel, and at
    that time a number of parents of victims of terrorist attacks,
    and terrorist murders asked that something be done in a very
    concrete way, and my response was that we would try to schedule
    a hearing on the subject and bring together people from the
    administration who are key participants.
        We have a very distinguished panel here with the Honorable
    Martin Indyk, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern
    Affairs, who has been an ambassador to Israel, has a very
    distinguished record, and knows this subject and many others
    related to it, and Deputy Assistant Attorney General Mark
    Richard, a man whom I have known for decades, who started his
    career in 1967 and is a real career professional, something
    that is unusual in Washington, D.C. Mark Richard brings a lot
    of information. I have worked with him since my days as
    district attorney in the City of Philadelphia.
        And we have relatives of victims, and then we have the
    chief representative of the Palestinian Authority to the United
    States with us today, a man whom I have known over the years
    and met with as recently as Tuesday of this week; when Chairman
    Arafat was in town, we had a meeting. And also the head of the
    legal assistance between Israel and the Palestinian Authority
    from the Israeli Ministry of Justice. So we have people who are
    in a position to know this subject and move ahead to try to
    resolve it.
        It is a matter of tremendous importance. Since the signing
    of the Oslo Accords, 12 American citizens have been killed in
    terrorist attacks. There is some dispute as to the number,
    depending on how you count an American citizen, but I think the
    accurate number is 12.
        There have been efforts to investigate the matter. There is
    a real question as to whether the administration is doing what
    should be done. We note that rewards of up to $5 million have
    been offered for information or other assistance to lead to the
    arrest or conviction in many, many other terrorist attacks, but
    according to the information provided to me, that is not
    present with the issues of the murder of U.S. citizens.
        There have been requests to the Palestinian Authority for
    the transfer to Israel of seven individuals who were suspected
    of murdering American citizens. There are specific factual
    matters which have to be determined to activate that, and they
    have not been turned over, and we are going to be asking very
    pointed questions on that subject.
        There is a question as to whether there has been adequate
    Israeli cooperation. I wrote on the subject back last May and
    received a response in July from the Acting Assistant Attorney
    General Sutin, complaining that the Israelis had delayed in
    complying with the October 1996 Department of Justice request
    for information. So there are many open questions.
        We are joined by our distinguished colleague, Senator
    Lautenberg, who has been a member of this subcommittee almost
    as long as I have. He was elected in 1982 and has been a very
    active participant on this subject and many subjects related to
    this matter. He has taken a leave from his duties as ranking
    member of the Budget Committee, which has its bill on the Floor
    today, to emphasize the importance of this for this hearing.
    Senator Lautenberg.

             prepared statements of senator leahy and senator bond

        At this point in the record, I would like to include a
    prepared statement from Senator Leahy and Senator Bond.
        [The statements follow:]
                  Prepared Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy
        Mr. Chairman, I welcome this hearing and am grateful to Senator
    Specter for taking the initiative.
        We are here to listen to testimony on a tragic and difficult
    matter. I am as outraged as anyone about the terrorist attacks that
    have killed and injured Americans in Israel. We are all concerned about
    our ability to protect Americans abroad and to bring the perpetrators
    to justice. It should not matter whether a person is Israeli,
    Palestinian, or American--if there is credible evidence that a crime
    has been committed, justice should be served.
        There is confusion about the facts in these cases and what efforts
    the Palestinian Authority, Israel and the United States have made to
    investigate and prosecute the people responsible for these crimes.
        Rumor, speculation and longstanding mistrust between Israelis and
    Palestinians have only added to the confusion. Press reports contain
    widely varying accounts of the number of suspected Palestinian
    terrorists, including those implicated in the killings of Americans,
    who have been sentenced, released or who remain at large.
        Both sides accuse the other of failing to live up to their
    obligations under the Wye Memorandum.
        I have asked the State Department and the Justice Department for
    their views. It is my understanding that investigations of the
    terrorist attacks are ongoing, but that to date the administration does
    not believe there is enough evidence to issue indictments. I hope that
    this hearing will provide the answers that we and the victims' families
    are seeking.
        I look forward to learning what the administration is doing to
    pursue these cases, what the evidence is, and what cooperation they are
    receiving.
        It is somewhat ironic that the organizations most vocal about the
    need to extradite Palestinians suspected of killing Americans have not
    also raised their voices to protest the decision by the Israeli Supreme
    Court to deny extradition requests for Samuel Sheinbein, a fugitive who
    has flagrantly sought to avoid justice in this country.
        This hearing is not only about American victims of the longstanding
    conflict between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Suicide bombings
    and other attacks have claimed the lives of many innocent Israelis.
    Palestinians have died needlessly in indiscriminate killings. The
    violence continues and it claims lives on all sides.
        Mr. Chairman, this hearing goes to the heart of the Oslo Accords
    and the Wye Memorandum, and whether the officials who signed those
    agreements are making good faith efforts to fulfill their security
    obligations and cooperate in the interest of ending the senseless
    bloodshed that has done nothing but prolong the suffering of innocent
    people.
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of Senator Christopher S. Bond
        Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for coming before us to discuss the
    current situation facing all parties involved in the painful and
    painfully slow search for a lasting and fruitful peace in the Middle
    East.
        This nation is blessed in that we have determined amongst ourselves
    that we can live together--and live together with our neighbors, in a
    state of peace. We come from varied backgrounds, some came here
    voluntarily, some not. Some came in search of a haven from oppression,
    some came in search of opportunity and prosperity. We are a nation of
    very different peoples forged in a crucible of democracy based on the
    tenet that each one of us is entitled to live peacefully alongside our
    neighbor. It has not been easy. It has required an intensive and long
    learning process and we have experienced severe pain, sometimes self
    inflleted, to arrive at our own peace. I raise this because I am afraid
    that until children are taught that they can coexist, the cycle will
    not be broken for the reasons we are discussing today. I am afraid that
    inciting the children to sacrifice themselves to kill other innocents
    through terrorist attacks on buses and in coffee houses and
    restaurants, and on busy streets, does nothing to further the cause of
    peace. I am afraid that turning a blind eye to inciteful rhetoric,
    empty promises, and cow towing to threats of violence unless one group
    or another gets their way, is no way for this nation to conduct a
    successful foreign policy. It distresses me when individuals are
    praised and worshiped for killing innocents. It distresses me greatly,
    when national leaders speak of driving people into the sea, of forcing
    people to ``drink from the waters of the Dead Sea.''
        I look forward to your comments and the lively discussion I
    anticipate during this herring.

                opening statement of senator frank r. lautenberg

        Senator Lautenberg. Thanks very much, Senator Specter, for
    scheduling this hearing on two important subjects, the Wye aid
    package and terrorist attacks on U.S. citizens in Israel.
        I must say that few here have taken the active interest
    that Senator Specter has in these matters, Senator Specter has
    traveled to what I would consider some risky places to see if
    he could bring people to the table, bring heads of government
    to the table to engage in sensible dialog to achieve peaceful
    resolution of the dispute. I am sure, though those efforts do
    not turn out the kinds of effects we would like to see
    immediately, it does have an impact, and we thank you, Senator
    Specter, for your hard work.
        I am delighted to see Ambassador Martin Indyk. He served
    with distinction as our Ambassador to Israel before assuming
    his present important post as Assistant Secretary for Near
    Eastern Affairs. And Mr. Richard, we do not know each other
    directly, but I know of your reputation. We are pleased to have
    you here.
        Mr. Richard. Thank you.
        Senator Lautenberg. I hope that we will hear how we can
    best support the peace process. In my view, one step we have
    got to take is the United States must fulfill President
    Clinton's commitment at Wye River to additional aid to support
    redeployment of Israeli forces, and to improve conditions in
    the West Bank and Gaza.
        I visited there a few months ago, and I am persuaded that
    unless we start to see some improvement in the living standard
    of the inhabitants of Gaza and the West Bank, that you can
    never really rely on stability to take over. You cannot have
    that kind of disparity between one community and another and
    expect the people to sit back and settle for the deplorable
    conditions. So I support fully what we are committed to do.
        Our emergency supplemental which we now have in front of us
    includes $100 million also in aid to Jordan, to demonstrate our
    support during the transition following the passing of a great
    and dear friend of peace, King Hussein.
        I am disappointed, however, that we have not included the
    Wye aid package for Israel and the Palestinians in this
    supplemental bill. I do not know what kind of recourse we have
    there. But we will watch with interest and try to seize any
    opportunity that we can to make sure that we fulfill a
    commitment that we have to both parties, even as we hope that
    both parties will fulfill their commitment to the agreement.
        In my view we should implement fully the Wye River
    memorandum as soon as that process is back on track. Meanwhile,
    we must not let violence divert us from the road to peace. We
    must continue to pursue justice against those who have
    committed terrorist acts, particularly those who have injured
    or killed American citizens. The Palestinian Authority must
    fully investigate any leads in these cases and arrest and
    prosecute every individual responsible for terrorism, and we
    must stand with the American victims and the families in their
    quest for some measure of justice.
        I want to welcome a friend and constituent, Steve Flatow.
    Steve is going to be testifying today. Since a suicide bomber
    took the life of Steve's daughter Alisa in 1995--it was a day
    also that I arrived in Israel on a trip and placed a call to
    the Flatow family; Steve was already on his way to Israel; he
    had been notified--we have worked together to try to undermine
    the sources of support for terrorism.
        I have great respect for the efforts of Steve Flatow to try
    to deter that pain and that anguish from any other family. His
    daughter was in Israel as an innocent traveler. She wasn't in
    uniform. She was a student, she wasn't pursuing a course in
    conflict. It was a disastrous attack that was leveled against
    her and her friends.
        Well, on the basis of legislation that I introduced, Mr.
    Flatow won a $247 million judgment against Iran as a state
    sponsor of the terrorist act which killed his daughter. I was
    in the courtroom when the decisions were handed down, first to
    judge that terrorists were Iran state-supported and, second,
    when the damage award was made. I continue to work with Steve
    Flatow to help him collect on his judgment against Iran. I only
    wish the administration would be helping us more rather than
    obstructing this effort.
        I also want to welcome Vicki Eisenfeld. Her son Matt was
    killed at the same time as Sara Duker, from another constituent
    family from New Jersey, in another terrorist attack. I look
    forward to working with Mrs. Eisenfeld to identify and hold
    responsible those who financed, planned, and carried out these
    heinous crimes.
        I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses, Mr.
    Chairman, this morning to see how we can sustain and revitalize
    the peace process and how we can work together to combat the
    scourge of terrorism in the Middle East and all around the
    world. I thank you very much for holding this hearing.

                      summary statement of mark m. richard

        Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Senator Lautenberg.
    We have listed Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard No. 1
    and Secretary Indyk as No. 2, so we will proceed in that order.
    Welcome, Mr. Richard. I know that you have served in the
    Justice Department since 1979, a trial attorney in the Fraud
    Section, chief of the Major Violations Unit, director of the
    Attorney General's White Collar Crime Committee.
        I thank you for joining us, and the floor is yours. We
    would like to limit the opening statements, if we might, to 5
    minutes, leaving the maximum amount of time for dialogue,
    questions and answers. All statements will be made a part of
    the record in their entirety.
        Mr. Richard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me begin by
    apologizing for the lateness of the delivery of my statement.
    We will endeavor to be more timely in the future. I do want to
    apologize.

                       investigation of terrorist attacks

        I will summarize just key portions of the statement. The
    Department of Justice, and more particularly the FBI, initiates
    an inquiry into each and every terrorist attack that causes the
    death of a U.S. citizen abroad. The terrorist attacks that
    killed American citizens in Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza
    over the last several years are no exception.
        Moreover, U.S. nationals who suffer injuries but who
    survive terrorist attacks, such as Diane Campesano, these
    incidents are also investigated by the FBI.
        With regard to the particular facts of the cases here, I
    would say that the attacks that killed David Boim and Yaron
    Ungar were drive-by shootings. Sara Duker, Matthew Eisenfeld,
    Ira Weinstein, Alisa Flatow, Joanne Davenny, Leah Stern and
    Yael Botwin were killed in suicide bombing attacks that
    occurred in public places. Nachon Wachsman, a dual United
    States-Israeli citizen and an Israeli soldier, was kidnapped
    and held for ransom before being killed by his captors during
    an Israeli rescue attempt.
        In each of these cases responsibility was claimed either by
    HAMAS or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The State of Israel or
    the Palestinian Authority have already arrested and convicted
    many of the surviving terrorists they claim were involved in
    these attacks, and those persons are now serving sentences in
    Israeli and Palestinian prisons.

                              information sources

        As much of the information that we have regarding these
    incidents is derived from Israeli and Palestinian authorities,
    it would be inappropriate to go into, in great detail, the
    information that we have available regarding these incidents.
    Moreover, public revelation at this point of such information
    could very well prejudice our ongoing inquiries.
        Let me describe, though, briefly our efforts to secure
    cooperation from both the Israelis and Palestinian authorities.
    These efforts involve both formal diplomatic correspondence and
    more informal exchanges of information.
        In each of the eight attacks I have listed, the FBI
    deployed investigators to the region after the incident.
    Thereafter, the FBI, through the Department of Justice,
    submitted through diplomatic channels two formal requests in
    which we sought from Israel such things as investigative and
    forensic reports, witness statements, and confessions.
        Although Israel's response to these requests are not as
    timely or forthcoming as we had hoped--our first request was
    denied in part because of Israeli concerns that disclosure of
    some information could compromise their national security--we
    have nevertheless been able to obtain material information and
    additional assistance through more direct in-person meetings
    with our Israeli counterparts.
        In March 1998 I led a Department of Justice and FBI
    delegation to Israel, where we were able to secure significant
    commitments from the Israelis to provide us with all of their
    law enforcement materials pertinent to these cases, subject to
    national security considerations. During this visit we also
    received assurances from Chairman Arafat that the Palestinian
    Authority would similarly cooperate in our efforts to bring
    killers of American citizens to justice.

                              joint investigations

        I would note that both with respect to the Israelis and the
    Palestinians that their commitment does not necessarily include
    a willingness to allow American investigators to conduct on-
    the-ground investigations about these incidents. They are
    willing to give the FBI access to nonclassified information
    generated by their law enforcement and intelligence apparatus,
    but at present they are not prepared to allow joint United
    States-Israeli or United States-Palestinian investigations.
        Senator Specter. Who was that?
        Mr. Richard. Both the Palestinians and the Israelis. They
    do not conduct joint investigations. I would add, though, I am
    not sure that if the tables were reversed that we would allow
    independent foreign investigators to conduct inquiries in our
    territory under similar circumstances.
        Documentary evidence provided by the Israelis and the
    Palestinians has enhanced our understanding of these incidents.
    In October 1998 another Department of Justice team, consisting
    of two prosecutors and several FBI agents, traveled to
    Jerusalem, remaining there for a 2-week period to engage in
    face-to-face meetings and interviews with Israeli police
    officers and prosecutors who handle these cases, from the crime
    scene through the investigation and prosecution. These meetings
    were very fruitful.
        Since October the FBI has been in periodic contact with the
    Israeli Ministry of Justice, and they will be returning to the
    region in the near future.

                               prepared statement

        Let me just add in closing that these extraterritorial
    investigations are complex, but they are nevertheless guided by
    the same standards that apply to prosecutions of Federal crimes
    in the United States, and that is only when we have sufficient
    admissible evidence available for use at trial that can obtain
    and support a conviction will we seek an indictment. Until that
    point is reached in these cases, there is no basis for us
    seeking transfer of suspects being held in either Israeli or
    Palestinian custody.
        Mr. Chairman, that completes my summary of the statement. I
    will be glad to answer any questions you may have.
        Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Mr. Richard.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of Mark M. Richard
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am pleased to be
    here today to discuss the Department of Justice's current
    investigations into terrorist attacks that killed American citizens in
    Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza.
        The Department, and more particularly the Federal Bureau of
    Investigation, initiates an inquiry into each and every terrorist
    attack that causes the death of a U.S. citizen abroad. The terrorist
    attacks that killed American citizens in Israel, the West Bank, and
    Gaza over the last several years are no exception. Among the incidents
    that the FBI is currently investigating are the terrorist attacks that
    killed:
      --Nachon Wachsman (October 9, 1994),
      --Alisa Flatow (April 9, 1995),
      --Joanne Davenny (August 21, 1995),
      --Sara Duker, Matthew Eisenfeld and Ira Weinstein (February 25,
            1996),
      --David Boim (May 13, 1996),
      --Yaron Ungar (June 9, 1996),
      --Leah Stern (July 30, 1997), and
      --Yael Botwin (September 4, 1997).
        I should note that this list does not include U.S. nationals who
    suffered injuries but who survived terrorist attacks, although the FBI
    investigates those cases as well.
        With regard to the particular facts of these eight cases, two of
    them--the attacks that killed David Boim and Yaron Ungar--were drive-by
    shootings. Sara Duker, Matthew Eisenfeld, Ira Weinstein, Alisa Flatow,
    Joanne Davenny, Leah Stern and Yael Botwin were killed in suicide
    bombing attacks that occurred in public places. Nachon Wachsman, a dual
    U.S.-Israeli citizen and Israeli soldier, was kidnaped and held for
    ransom before being killed by his captors during an Israeli rescue
    attempt.
        In each of these cases, responsibility was claimed either by HAMAS
    or the Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ). The State of Israel or the
    Palestinian Authority has arrested and convicted many of the surviving
    terrorists they claim were involved in these attacks, and those persons
    are now serving sentences in Israeli and Palestinian prisons.
        The Department's investigation into these attacks is multi-
    faceted, and involves both formal, diplomatic correspondence and more
    informal exchanges of information between Israeli and American law
    enforcement. In each of the eight attacks I have listed, the FBI
    deployed investigators to the region after the incident. Thereafter,
    the FBI, through the Department of Justice, submitted through
    diplomatic channels two formal requests--known as ``Judicial Assistance
    Requests'' or ``Letters of Request''--in which we sought from Israel
    such things as investigative and forensic reports, witness statements
    and confessions. Although Israel's response to these requests was not
    as timely or forthcoming as we had hoped--our first request was denied
    in part because of Israeli concerns that disclosure of some information
    could compromise their national security--we have been able to obtain
    material information and additional assistance through more direct, in-
    person meetings with our Israeli counterparts.
        In March 1998, I led a Department of Justice and FBI delegation to
    Israel, where we were able to secure a commitment from the Israelis to
    provide us with all of their law enforcement materials pertinent to
    these cases, subject to national security considerations. During this
    visit, we also received assurances from Chairman Arafat that the
    Palestinian Authority would similarly cooperate in our efforts to bring
    killers of American citizens to justice.
        With regard to the Israelis, I should note that their commitment
    does not include a willingness to allow American investigators to join
    the Israeli police in developing evidence immediately after the
    occurrence of an incident. They are willing to give the FBI access to
    non-classified information generated by their law enforcement and
    intelligence apparatus, but at present they are not prepared to allow
    joint U.S.-Israeli investigations into terrorist attacks that occur in
    the region. To place this position in context, I should note that, in
    the majority of terrorist attacks of this sort, the Israeli victims
    outnumber the Americans. In the blast that killed Americans SaraDuker,
    Matthew Eisenfeld and Ira Weinstein, for example, 22 Israelis died. In
    this light, it is understandable that the Israeli government would be
    inclined to pursue these investigations, at least initially, without
    our assistance or direct participation.
        Documentary evidence provided by the Israelis and the Palestinians
    as a result of the March visit has enhanced our understanding of these
    incidents and has provided us with the means of following up with
    requests for additional information. In October, 1998, a Department of
    Justice team consisting of two prosecutors and several FBI agents
    traveled to Jerusalem over a two-week period to engage in face-to-face
    meetings with the Israeli police officers and prosecutors who handled
    these cases, from the crime scene through the investigation and
    prosecution. In our view, these meetings were fruitful; in addition to
    receiving thousands of pages of additional investigative material and
    interviewing several Israeli police officers, the Department
    established a channel of communication that we believe will facilitate
    not only these cases but future investigations as well. Since October,
    the FBI has been in periodic contact with the Israeli Ministry of
    Justice personnel, and they will be returning to the region in the near
    future. Our current efforts place priority on those terrorists who
    remain at large or who have yet to be brought to trial.
        In pursuing these extraterritorial investigations, the Department
    is guided by the same standards that apply to prosecutions of federal
    crimes in the United States: only when sufficient admissible evidence
    is developed and available for use at trial, such that we could obtain
    a conviction in a U.S. court, do we seek an indictment. Until that
    point is reached in these cases, there is not a basis for our seeking
    the transfer of suspects being held in Israeli or Palestinian custody.
        The extraterritorial nature of these investigations adds a
    complicating--though not insurmountable--factor to the Department's
    pursuit of them. In addition to the fact that the evidentiary material
    is largely in Hebrew and must be run through an extensive translation
    process, it is collected in accordance with a legal system and
    evidentiary standards that are different from our own. Moreover, in
    putting together an American prosecution, the Department must go beyond
    the evidence itself and determine how that evidence could be presented
    in a form that would be admissible in a U.S. proceeding and how it
    would be received in the context of a jury trial. Thus, in each of
    these cases, our prosecutors must determine whether additional
    investigative steps are necessary to meet evidentiary or procedural
    standards that may be different from or even more onerous than what is
    required in Israel. This determination must necessarily start with the
    translated Israeli evidence we are still in the process of receiving as
    a result of the March and October, 1998 visits.
        These factors should not be read to imply that American criminal
    laws cannot reach terrorists who harm U.S. interests abroad. In fact,
    recent experience shows that the contrary is true. In June, 1998, for
    example, the FBI arrested Mohammed Rashed, who had been indicted by the
    United States in 1987 for the 1982 bombing or a Pan Am flight
    originating in Tokyo. He is currently awaiting trial in Washington. In
    addition to this case, over the last decade the Department has
    successfully prosecuted several cases in which defendants had to be
    arrested abroad and brought back to stand trial in the United States
    for acts of international terrorism committed overseas. In many of
    these cases, the Department pursued the investigations through evidence
    provided by other countries.
        The Department remains committed to the pursuit of these terrorism
    investigations, and we will continue our efforts to bring the
    investigations to a successful conclusion.
        Mr. Chairman, this concludes my statement. I would be happy to
    answer questions from you and the members of the Subcommittee. I should
    stress that, as these cases remain under active criminal investigation,
    we would prefer to limit discussion of their particular details.

                      SUMMARY STATEMENT OF MARTIN S. INDYK

        Senator Specter. We now turn to Mr. Martin Indyk, Assistant
    Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs. He served as U.S.
    Ambassador to Israel from 1995 to 1997 and prior to that was
    Special Assistant to the President and Senior Director for Near
    East and South Asian Affairs at the National Security Council.
    Welcome, Mr. Indyk, and the floor is yours.
        Mr. Indyk. Thank you very much, Senator Specter. I am very
    grateful for this opportunity to address the Senate
    Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, and in
    particular to address you, sir, and Senator Lautenberg, whom I
    also know. I have had the pleasure of working with both of you
    to advance our interests, particularly those facing the Middle
    East.
        I do not know of two other Members of Congress or the
    Senate who have been more actively engaged from the time that I
    have been in the administration. We gratefully appreciate your
    involvement, your active interest in this, and we appreciate
    the opportunity to work with you, not only here, but of course
    out there in Israel, Gaza, and the West Bank on your many
    visits there. We appreciate that highly.
        If you will allow me, Senator Specter, I did want to just
    make a few remarks about our request for the Wye supplemental
    package, which I understand is----
        Senator Specter. Mr. Secretary, that is fine.
        Mr. Indyk. That is one of the issues. I have got much
    longer remarks that I appreciate your putting on the record. I
    will summarize those.
        Senator Specter. Without objection those will be made a
    part of the record.
        Mr. Indyk. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman, in this part
    of the world it is impossible to separate our political and our
    economic interests. Economic progress in the Middle East serves
    America's political interests and political progress serves our
    economic interests.
        The linkages between economics and our political goals are
    nowhere clearer than in our efforts to achieve a secure,
    stable, and lasting peace in the Middle East. We have over the
    years made a major contribution to Israel's economic well-
    being. With a GNP approaching $100 billion and a standard of
    living equal to much of Western Europe, Israel is now able to
    stand on its own feet economically. This has enabled the
    Congress to begin the phaseout of economic assistance to
    Israel.
        On the other side, however, Israel's Arab partners in the
    peace process face daunting economic challenges, first and
    foremost high unemployment rates, which are undercutting
    support for the peace process. Unemployment in the West Bank
    and Gaza and Jordan is in the 20- to 30-percent range. Per
    capita incomes are one-tenth of Israel, and with populations
    that expected a dividend in return for the risks their leaders
    took for peace, continued economic stagnation is damaging to
    the peace process and to our other interests in the region.
        So economic progress in the West Bank and Gaza and Jordan
    is essential to our political objectives of advancing the peace
    process, and that is why the Wye supplemental is so important,
    as Senator Lautenberg pointed out, in helping to provide the
    critical economic underpinnings for this phase of the peace
    process and for the final stages of talks to come.
        The signing of the Wye River memorandum was an important
    milestone for the Middle East peace process. That memorandum
    establishes a parallel process for the implementation of all
    outstanding obligations of both sides, the Palestinians and the
    Israelis, under the Interim Agreement.
        Jordan, too, played an important role at Wye, and we depend
    on it to play a key role in the peace process as it evolves. In
    this transition period following the death of King Hussein, we
    need to send a strong signal of support for King Abdullah as he
    continues in the footsteps of his father.
        Both the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority
    requested U.S. financial support to help them implement the Wye
    Memorandum and to provide a tangible demonstration of U.S.
    support as they approach the final-stage talks.
        Our pledge to work with Congress to secure $400 million in
    supplemental assistance for the Palestinians has already
    enabled us to mobilize increased assistance to the tune of
    about $3 billion in commitments made at the international
    donors conference the President hosted last fall. The
    Palestinians need to know that as they fulfill their Wye
    obligations, their economic circumstances will improve.
        On the Israeli side, the implementation of Wye will involve
    security-related costs that the President has promised to help
    defray. At the same time as Israel makes peace with the
    Palestinians, it is also facing wider security challenges which
    it is seeking our assistance to pay for, and as part of our
    long-standing commitment to Israel's security, the President
    believes it is important to provide additional funding to help
    Israel meet these wider security challenges.
        I will not go through the details of the Wye package. It is
    in my formal presentation. I will just summarize it by saying
    that we are seeking $1.2 billion in foreign military financing
    (FMF) for Israel, $400 million in economic support funds (ESF)
    for the Palestinians, and $300 million for Jordan, broken down
    as $100 million in ESF and $200 million in FMF.
        In the case of Jordan, the Senate has already taken action,
    which we appreciate very much, in approving the first $100
    million tranche of this amount last Tuesday. It is important
    that we move forward quickly to demonstrate our support for
    Jordan's King Abdullah, and this will help significantly.
        It will also help in the effort that the President has
    undertaken to mobilize the Gulf States, the Europeans, our
    other G-7 allies, the Israelis, the IMF and the World Bank to
    support the various components of a broad package for Jordan of
    debt relief, debt rescheduling, additional aid, and an effort
    to expand the market for Jordanian goods and labor, both in the
    Gulf and in the West Bank and in Israel.
        The supplemental is a key element in our approach. We need
    to deliver the full $300 million that the President has
    requested to maintain our leadership in this effort, to ensure
    a stable transition, and to provide the leverage to bring other
    partners on board in this effort to help provide Jordan with
    the means to ensure that it can grow its economy in this
    difficult period.
        In regard to Israel, in recent months we have met on a
    number of occasions with Israeli officials from the Ministry of
    Finance and Defense to define together the allocation of the
    $1.2 billion that we are seeking in supplementary security-
    related assistance.
        We have worked with the Israelis to prioritize their
    requirements, focusing heavily on U.S.-sourced FMF that would
    be provided to the Ministry of Defense. We are moving close to
    agreement with the Israelis on this full package. We have
    agreed to finance certain expenses relating to relocation of
    Israeli Army bases from the West Bank to Israel proper. These
    would be priority items for fiscal year 1999 funding. We are
    looking into the possibility of the Army Corps of Engineers
    serving as project manager for this effort.
        We also believe we should support other counterterrorism
    requirements that the Israelis have, including explosives
    detection and identification equipment and field vehicles.
        Finally, we are looking at meeting a portion of Israel's
    strategic military requirements. These include items such as
    theater missile defense, a subject which I know is close to the
    heart of many in the Senate; and related R&D costs that could
    help Israel address the emerging Iranian missile threat;
    Longbow helicopter upgrades; electronic warfare aerial
    platforms, and other communications and munitions requirements.
        Our discussions with the Israelis are progressing well, and
    we expect to finalize the complete package in the coming weeks.
        As for the Palestinians, they have pressing needs
    associated with Wye implementation, as Senator Lautenberg has
    mentioned. Their standard of living has fallen by some 40
    percent since the signing of the Oslo Accords. Instead of
    enjoying the tangible benefits of peace, the Palestinian
    economy suffered a severe downturn.
        We are seeking in fiscal year 1999 a total of $200 million
    in supplemental resources for specific developmental projects,
    $100 million of that used for projects directly related to Wye
    implementation, such as security equipment to facilitate
    movement of Palestinian workers and goods through processing
    points, cold storage equipment at the Gaza airport, and
    resources for enhanced people-to-people programs.
        An additional $100 million will be programmed for urgent
    Palestinian needs, focusing on activities such as community
    development, rule of law, maternal child health care, a
    scholarship program for higher education in key sectors, and
    the urgent task of preparing the Palestinians to take advantage
    of the potential for tourism in the year of the millennium.
        In the out years, in 2000, 2001, the proposal would include
    $100 million each for projects with longer lead times that
    involve key infrastructure projects in the West Bank, things
    like the West Bank industrial estate.
        It is our view that it is important to secure congressional
    support now for the full Palestinian funding package.
    Programmatically we need the certainty of the out year funding
    to enable us to begin to identify funding intermediaries and
    structures for projects in areas such as community development.
        It is important to emphasize that all these funds would be
    directly administered by USAID for specific projects for the
    benefit of the Palestinian people. No funds go to the
    Palestinian Authority itself.
        Disbursement of both the Israeli and Palestinian components
    of this package would only occur in the context of Wye
    implementation. We are pressing both sides to fully meet their
    Wye obligations. The key Israeli commitment is to a sequence of
    redeployments in the West Bank. The key Palestinian commitment
    involves sustained and intensive security cooperation to fight
    terrorism and its infrastructure.
        In the Wye Memorandum, the Palestinians committed
    themselves to a more rigorous and systematic set of security
    obligations than they have done in any previous agreement with
    the Israelis. It includes systematic unilateral efforts to
    prevent terror, according to a detailed security work plan;
    intensive cooperation with Israel's security services;
    bilateral cooperation with us; and a trilateral security
    structure with both Israel and the United States.
        Since the signing of the Wye Memorandum, the Palestinians
    have taken some important steps to combat terrorism and
    terrorist organizations. They have arrested scores of HAMAS
    members, interrogated terrorism suspects, and acted on that
    information. Recently Palestinian security force operations
    prevented what would have been very serious terrorist acts in
    Israel. Mr. Netanyahu recently telephoned Chairman Arafat to
    acknowledge these particular operations. Israeli Defense
    Minister Arens has also spoken publicly in positive terms about
    what the Palestinians have been doing to combat terror.
        Mr. Chairman, I think I have been reading the Jerusalem
    Post for the last 6 years every day, as you probably have. I
    have not seen a headline like this one that appeared yesterday
    which says ``Netanyahu lauds the Palestinian Authority for
    preventing bombing.''
        More can and must be done because it is essential to peace
    that the Palestinians make a 100-percent effort to fight
    terrorism, both unilaterally and in cooperation with Israel.
    But we have seen some important progress, and it is important
    to bear in mind that this is happening at a time when Israel
    for various reasons is not going ahead with its obligations
    under the second phase of the Wye Agreement.
        At a time when this committee is understandably focusing on
    the glass half empty when it comes to the issue of fugitives,
    suspects who have been involved in the killing of American
    citizens, I hope you will also bear in mind that the glass is
    also half full when it comes to Palestinian actions against
    terrorism.
        We will continue to insist that the Palestinian leadership
    be even more vigilant in stopping these efforts. As in other
    aspects of the peace process, there must be a partnership on
    security between the Palestinian Authority and Israel. We are
    actively involved in fostering this partnership at the request
    of both sides, and it is now beginning to pay real dividends in
    terms of improving the security of the Israeli people.
        This underscores the important role the United States has
    to play in Wye implementation. What is needed now is increased
    bilateral assistance, in the first instance for Jordan, but
    also for Israel and the Palestinians as the Wye Memorandum is
    implemented.
        Mr. Chairman, we are at a key juncture in the Middle East.
    The Wye Agreement, with all its unmet promise, awaits full
    implementation. The final stage of talks are on the horizon.
    Israel is in the throes of intense internal debate about the
    trade-offs associated with peace as it approaches elections in
    May. Jordan is in a period of transition. The Palestinians, as
    they look to difficult future negotiations, are desperately
    seeking ways to deliver a peace dividend to their people for
    the agreements that have already been struck.

                               prepared statement

        We have a unique opportunity to help Israel and the
    Palestinians and Jordan make peace. This is a role the
    administration and Congress have played together since the
    beginning of the peace process in 1973. In the same vein, I
    hope Congress and the administration can work together in the
    coming months as we shape the package that can play a vital
    role in underpinning Middle East peace. Thank you very much,
    sir.
        Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Stastement of Martin S. Indyk
        I welcome this opportunity to discuss the President's request for
    the Wye Supplemental package and the question of implementation of the
    Wye Agreement by both sides.
          the confluence of economics and politics in the middle east
        Let me begin by making a general observation about the Middle East.
    In this age, and certainly in this part of the world, it is impossible
    to separate our political and our economic interests. Economic progress
    in the Middle East serves America's political interests, and political
    progress in the Middle East serves our economic interests.
        There is no better way, over the long run, to promote stability,
    good governance, and the rule of law than by broadening economic
    participation and fostering a rise in the standard of living of the
    people of the region. And, of course, economic growth in the Near East
    will also increase trade and investment opportunities for the U.S.
    private sector, another U.S. goal in the region.
        The linkages between economics and our political goals are nowhere
    clearer than in our efforts to achieve a secure, stable, and lasting
    peace in the Middle East--one of our primary goals in the Middle East.
    We have, over the years, made a major contribution to Israel's economic
    well being. With a GNP approaching $100 billion and a standard of
    living equal to much of Western Europe, Israel is now able to stand on
    its own feet economically, and this has enabled Congress to begin the
    phase-out of economic assistance to Israel. On the other side, Israel's
    Arab partners in the peace process face daunting economic challenges--
    first and foremost, high unemployment rates which are undercutting
    support for the peace process. Unemployment in the West Bank/Gaza and
    Jordan is in the 20- to 30-percent range. Per capita incomes are one-
    tenth of Israel's. And with populations that expected a dividend, in
    return for the risks their leaders took for peace, continued economic
    stagnation is damaging to the peace process and to our interests in the
    region.
        So economic progress in the West Bank and Gaza and Jordan is
    essential to our political objective of advancing the peace process.
    That is one of the reasons why the Wye Supplemental is so important: it
    will help provide the critical economic underpinnings for the next
    stage in the peace process.
                              the wye supplemental
        The signing of the Wye River Memorandum on October 23 was an
    important milestone for the Middle East peace process. Wye reflects
    Israeli/Palestinian agreement on the basic trade-off of land for
    security and establishes a parallel process for the implementation of
    all outstanding obligations of both sides under the Interim Agreement.
    The parties agree that effective implementation of the Wye agreement is
    the essential next step in the peace process.
        Jordan, too, played an important role at Wye, and we expect it will
    continue to play a key role in the peace process. In this transition
    period following the death of King Hussein, we need to send a strong
    signal of support for King Abdullah as he continues in the footsteps of
    his father.
        Both the Government of Israel and the Palestinian Authority
    requested U.S. financial support to help them implement the Wye
    Memorandum and to provide a tangible demonstration of U.S. support as
    they approach permanent status talks.
        In fact, the prospect of the package has already been valuable in
    developing support for Wye implementation. Our pledge to work with
    Congress to secure $400 million in supplemental assistance for the
    Palestinians helped mobilize increased assistance from other donors and
    demonstrate political support for Wye implementation. Last fall the
    President hosted a successful international donor's conference that
    raised over $3 billion to support Palestinian economic development.
        The Palestinians need to know that, as they fulfill their Wye
    obligations, their economic circumstances will improve. The financial
    backing of the international community also sends a strong signal of
    U.S. and international support as the Palestinian Authority undertakes
    difficult steps to fight terror.
        On the Israeli side, the implementation of Wye will involve
    security-related costs that the President has promised to help defray.
    At the same time Israel makes peace with the Palestinians, it is also
    facing wider security challenges for which it is seeking our financial
    assistance. As part of our long-standing commitment to Israel's
    security, the President felt it important to provide additional
    funding.
                            overview of wye package
        The Wye Supplemental request submitted to Congress on February 1
    totals $1.9 billion, divided among the three peace process parties as
    follows:
      --$1.2 billion in foreign military financing (FMF) for Israel;
      --$400 million in economic support funds (ESF) for the Palestinians;
      --$300 million for Jordan, broken down as
            --$100 million in economic support funds (ESF); and
            --$200 million in foreign military financing (FMF).
        Just under half, $900 million of the overall package, would be
    available in fiscal year 1999 supplemental resources to meet most
    immediate needs. This amount would be fully offset with budget
    authority. This breaks down to:
      --$600 million in FMF for Israel;
      --$200 million in ESF for the Palestinians; and
      --$100 million for Jordan--half ESF, half FMF.
        Some $500 million would be made available in fiscal year 2000,
    with:
      --$300 million in FMF for Israel;
      --$100 million in ESF for the Palestinians, and;
      --$100 million for Jordan--again, half ESF, half FMF.
        And the final $500 million of the package would be available in
    fiscal year 2001, with:
      --another $300 million in FMF for Israel;
      --another $100 million in ESF for the Palestinians, and;
      --$100 million for Jordan--this time all of it as FMF.
        Let me describe the three elements of this package in greater
    detail, beginning with the Jordanian component.
                                     jordan
        The President has signaled his intention to move forward
    immediately on seeking Congressional approval of the Jordanian element
    of the Wye package. We appreciate the actions by the Senate to approve
    the first $100 million tranche of this amount on Tuesday. We are at a
    key juncture in Jordan's history with the transition to new leadership
    during a period of ongoing regional tension, especially in Iraq. It is
    important that we move forward quickly to demonstrate our strong
    support for Jordan's King Abdullah.
        We have already seen the importance of our offer to accelerate $300
    million in supplemental funding--it helped calm markets and
    demonstrated U.S. leadership, putting us in a better position to get
    others to do their share.
        We are mobilizing the Gulf states, the Europeans, our other G-7
    allies, the Israelis, the IMF, and the World Bank to support the
    various components of a broad package of debt relief, additional aid,
    and expansion of markets for Jordanian goods and labor.
        The Supplemental is a key element in our approach. We need to
    deliver the full $300 million to maintain our leadership, to ensure a
    stable transition, and to provide the leverage to bring other partners
    on board.
        The Jordanian component of the Supplemental includes three
    elements:
      --In fiscal year 1999, a $100 million supplemental
      --with $50 million in ESF and $50 million FMF;
      --In fiscal year 2000, $100 million, again, evenly divided between
            ESF and FMF;
      --In fiscal year 2001, $100 million--all FMF.
        The fiscal year 1999 component is extremely important to
    demonstrate responsiveness to Jordan's needs for economic and military
    support in this transition period. On the economic side, there is a
    need for immediate balance-of-payments support linked to economic
    reforms. Our support would send a very important signal. Militarily,
    there is an urgent need to demonstrate support for the modernization
    and readiness of the Jordanian armed forces. We expect $50 million in
    fiscal year 1999 resources to begin to redress weaknesses in logistical
    readiness in three time-sensitive areas: a HAWK air defense support
    package; refurbishment of Cobra helicopters and vehicles; and Y2K
    readiness in the Jordanian military.
        Let me sketch out in greater detail the FMF and ESF components of
    this package.
        The FMF resources will address the severely degraded conditions of
    basic military items--air defense, munitions, border security
    equipment, night vision, communications gear, transportation equipment,
    helicopters, anti-tank missiles, and basic fixed-wing aircraft. The
    current Jordanian inventory will be obsolete in 5 years without this
    infusion, and Jordan can't defend its borders with Syria and Iraq
    without this equipment.
        The package developed by the Department of Defense contains the
    absolute minimum: spare parts, basic upgrades, and only the most
    essential equipment required to meet modernization and readiness needs.
        The ESF package is also critical.
        Jordan's economy has been stagnant in recent years despite its
    economic reform efforts. There is always a lag between reforms and
    growth, and Jordan faces a difficult economic environment, surrounded
    as it is by markets in Iraq, Syria, the Gulf, and Israel that have
    either been depressed, closed, or difficult to break into.
        Reducing unemployment and reviving economic growth are the key
    challenges facing the new king--and it is essential that he succeed.
        Half of the ESF component of the supplemental--$50 million--would
    be disbursed in fiscal year 1999 as balance-of-payments support. This
    would provide a much-needed shot in the arm for Jordan's balance of
    payments and would be keyed to an IMF reform program focusing on budget
    discipline and privatization. These two elements together should boost
    the market's confidence in the direction of the Jordanian economy and
    in the commitment of the international community to stand by Jordan
    during this transition period.
        We hope to disburse this initial $50 million before the middle of
    the year. The remaining $50 million in ESF would be as an advance
    appropriation for fiscal year 2000 and would be projectized--divided
    between water projects and regional development in the economically
    needy southern region.
        Increasing and improving Jordan's water supply is critical both in
    the near term and in the long term. Water could very well become the
    make-or-break issue for Middle East peace. Jordan faces a huge $3
    billion investment backlog in the water sector, which has led to over-
    pumping and damage to the aquifers. And, because of low rainfall, we
    are seeing the elements of a genuine crisis this year. It is essential
    that we demonstrate to the Jordanian people that we are working
    intensively on this problem and creating options for the fixture. Urban
    water shortages are already a politically sensitive issue; and there is
    a direct linkage to the peace process, given the water provisions of
    the 1994 Israel-Jordan peace treaty.
        We also need Congress to signal its strong support for the fiscal
    year 2000 and fiscal year 2001 components of this package. Politically,
    given the transition to new leadership, it is essential to deliver on
    the full $300 million package to demonstrate a firm U.S. commitment to
    continuity in our relationship with Jordan.
        Economically, announcement of the full package is already helping
    to bolster economic stability; accelerate rapprochement with Gulf
    countries; strengthen our hand as we seek greater EU and G-7 support on
    assistance and debt relief; and urge the Israelis to do more on trade
    access to Israeli and Palestinian markets.
        Programmatically, signaling support for the full $300 million
    package lets us work with the Jordanian military to put into place a
    comprehensive modernization and readiness program with the confidence
    that it will be financed.
                                     israel
        In recent months, we have met on a number of occasions with Israeli
    officials from the Ministries of Finance and Defense to define together
    the allocation of the $1.2 billion in supplemental security-related
    assistance.
        The Israelis originally cited more than $3 billion in security
    requirements in the wake of Wye, broken down into the costs of
    relocating military facilities, providing security and constructing by-
    pass roads, meeting strategic military requirements, meeting
    counterterrorism requirements, and meeting other civilian needs--for
    example in the water sector.
        We worked with the Israelis to prioritize their requirements,
    focused heavily on U.S.-sourced FMF that would be provided to the
    Ministry of Defense. We are proposing that half that amount be made
    available in fiscal year 1999 and the balance divided between fiscal
    year 2000 and fiscal year 2001.
        We are moving closer to agreement with the Israelis on the full
    package. We have agreed to finance certain expenses relating to
    relocation of bases from the West Bank to Israel proper--there is
    precedent from the Camp David period when we financed relocation of
    Israeli air bases from Sinai to the Negev. These would be priority
    items for fiscal year 1999 funding. We are looking into the possibility
    of the Army Corps of Engineers serving as project manager for this
    effort. Total costs of the base relocations would come to about $200
    million.
        We also believe we should support other counterterrorism needs
    including explosive detection and identification equipment and field
    vehicles. These would amount to another $175 million.
        Finally, we are looking at meeting a portion of Israel's strategic
    military requirements. These could include items such as Theater
    Missile Defense and related R&D costs that could help Israel address
    the emerging Iranian missile threat, Longbow helicopter upgrades,
    electronic warfare aerial platforms, and other communications and
    munitions requirements. We have not agreed on all these items, which
    would total about an additional $800 million. Some of these items have
    longer lead times and might be more suitable for fiscal year 2000 and
    fiscal year 2001 financing.
        Our discussions with the Israelis are progressing well, and we
    should be able to finalize a complete package in the coming weeks.
                                  palestinians
        The Palestinians also have pressing needs associated with Wye
    implementation. Their standard of living has fallen by some 40 percent
    since the signing of the Oslo accords. Instead of enjoying the tangible
    benefits of peace, the Palestinian economy has suffered a severe
    downturn. We need to help them turn this situation around.
        Our package can be divided into two components. For fiscal year
    1999, we will seek a total of $200 million in supplemental resources
    for specific development projects:
      --$100 million would be used for projects that are directly related
            to Wye implementation. These projects would be for the benefit
            of the Palestinians but we would be flexible regarding
            implementation. For example, we would be willing to use some of
            the funds for security equipment to facilitate movement of
            Palestinian workers and goods throughcrossing points. We might
            also use it for cold storage equipment at the Gaza airport,
            safe passage infrastructure,and resources for enhanced people-
            to-people programs.
      --An additional $100 million would be programmed for urgent
            Palestinian needs focusing on activities such as community
            development, rule of law, maternal-child healthcare, a
            scholarship program for higher education in key sectors, and
            the urgent task of preparing the Palestinians to take advantage
            of the potential for tourism in the millennialyear.
        For fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001, our package would
    include $100 million each for projects with longer lead times but for
    which we need to begin planning now. These include a wide range of
    community development activities, key infrastructure projects, and a
    West Bank industrial estate, which could catalyze the kind of private
    sector development in the West Bank that we are already beginning to
    see at the Gaza Industrial Estate.
        It is very important to secure congressional support now for the
    full Palestinian funding package. Programmatically, we need the
    certainty of the out-year funding to enable us to begin to identify
    funding intermediaries and structures for projects in areas such as
    community development. It is important to emphasize that all these
    funds would be directly administered by USAID for specific projects for
    the benefit of the Palestinian people. No funds go to the Palestinian
    Authority itself.
                        palestinian security performance
        Disbursement of both the Israeli and Palestinian components of this
    package would only occur in the context of Wye implementation.
        We are pressing both sides to fully meet their Wye obligations. The
    key Israeli commitment is to a sequence of redeployments in the West
    Bank. The key Palestinian commitment involves sustained and intensive
    security cooperation to fight terrorism and its infrastructure.
        When the Wye River Memorandum was signed at the White House on
    October 23, 1998, President Clinton said the Memorandum was good for
    Israel's security because it committed the Palestinians to highly
    specific and comprehensive actions to fight terror. Prime Minister
    Netanyahu made the case for the Wye Memorandum to his own people in
    much the same terms.
        In the Wye Memorandum, the Palestinians committed themselves to a
    more rigorous and systematic set of security obligations than they had
    done in any previous agreement with the Israelis. It included
    systematic unilateral efforts to prevent terror according to a detailed
    work plan, intensive cooperation with Israel's security services,
    bilateral cooperation with the U.S., and a trilateral security
    structure with both Israel and the U.S.
        Since the signing of the Wye Memorandum, the Palestinians have
    taken some important steps to combat terrorism and terrorist
    organizations. They have arrested scores of HAMAS members, interrogated
    terrorism suspects, and acted on that information. Recently,
    Palestinian Authority security force operations prevented what would
    have been very serious terrorist acts in Israel. Prime Minister
    Netanyahu telephoned Chairman Arafat to acknowledge these particular
    operations. Defense Minister Arens has also spoken publicly in positive
    terms about what the Palestinians have been doing to combat terror. The
    Palestinians are continuing to hold bilateral meetings with us and
    trilateral meetings with the Israelis and our people to coordinate
    these anti-terror efforts. They have taken steps to end the ``revolving
    door'' for Palestinian prisoners. In response to our efforts and their
    own obligations, the Palestinians have shared with us their latest
    security work plan.
        More can and must be done because it is essential to peace that the
    Palestinians make a 100 percent effort to fight terrorism, both
    unilaterally and in cooperation with Israel. We have seen some
    important progress. But the enemies of peace are determined and
    vigilant in their efforts to destroy what has been built. We will
    continue to insist that the Palestinian leadership be even more
    vigilant in stopping these efforts. As in other aspects of the peace
    process, there must be a partnership on security between the
    Palestinian Authority and Israel. We are actively involved in fostering
    this partnership at the request of both sides, and it is now beginning
    to pay real dividends in terms of improving the security of the Israeli
    people.
                                   conclusion
        This underscores the important role the United States has to play
    in Wye implementation. We have a finite number of economic tools at our
    disposal as we try to support our objectives in the Middle East. What
    is needed now is increased bilateral assistance--in the first instance
    for Jordan, but also for Israel and the Palestinians as the Wye
    Memorandum is implemented.
        We are at a key juncture in the Middle East. The Wye agreement,
    with all its unmet promise, awaits full implementation. Final status
    talks are on the horizon. Israel is in the throes of an intense
    internal debate about the trade-offs associated with peace as it
    approaches elections in May. Jordan is in a period of transition. The
    Palestinians, as they look to difficult future negotiations, are
    desperately trying to deliver a peace dividend from agreements of the
    past.
        And, more broadly, we sense that the strategic window for
    peacemaking that opened following the Gulf war and the collapse of the
    Soviet Union is beginning to close. Where once there was hope, there is
    increasingly disillusion; where once there was a process of confidence
    building, there is now growing mistrust; where once a regional
    coalition for peace was emerging, there is now a retreat into a
    dangerous state of limbo. It is a matter of history that, when there is
    no progress toward peace, a political vacuum develops, which is rapidly
    filled by political extremism and violence.
        We have a unique opportunity to help Israel, the Palestinians, and
    Jordan make peace. This is a role the Administration and Congress have
    played together since the beginning of the peace process in 1973. In
    the same vein, I hope Congress and the Administration can work together
    in the coming months as we shape a package that can play a vital role
    in underpinning Middle East peace.
        Thank you.

                                    offsets

        Senator Specter. Before proceeding to the questioning, we
    have been joined by the distinguished chairman of the full
    committee, Senator Stevens. Would you care to make a comment at
    this point?
        Senator Stevens. Thank you very much. We have several
    subcommittees meeting this morning. I do appreciate your
    courtesy in letting me ask a question. I do not understand
    these offsets. You say that the offsets for the Wye Agreement
    are there. Explain those offsets to me, will you?
        Mr. Indyk. Mr. Chairman, this is something on which, as you
    know, the Office of Management and Budget is engaged in
    negotiations with you and others on this committee and in the
    House. The offsets are being put together by the Office of
    Management and Budget, so it is----
        Senator Stevens. I am looking at your statement. On page 2
    it says that these amounts will be fully offset with budget
    authority. This breaks down to $600 million is the first item
    in FMF for Israel, but the package itself is $1.2 billion for
    Israel. Is that a list of what is in the package or is it a
    list of the offset?
        Mr. Indyk. What is presented here is--what we have laid out
    is the full request for $1.2 billion for Israel over 3 years.
        Senator Stevens. That is a breakdown of the request, not of
    the offset?
        Mr. Indyk. That's right, that is a breakdown of the
    request.
        Senator Stevens. I have been trying to find out what the
    offsets are, and I would urge you to let us know.
        Mr. Indyk. I will be glad to get the OMB to provide that to
    you, sir.
        [The information follows:]

        Our request for funding the requirements of the Wye memorandum was
    presented as a supplemental request for fiscal year 1999 and as an
    advance appropriation for fiscal year 2000 and fiscal year 2001. The
    offsets we identified included $18 million in FMF, as identified in the
    President's fiscal year 2000 budget request. Remaining offsets we
    proposed came from outside of the foreign affairs budget.

        Senator Stevens. I am constrained to ask one question. You
    entered into this agreement in October, and I think it is an
    important one. It has substantial support. But did anyone tell
    you that there was a budget ceiling and we did not have the
    money unless it was offset?
        Mr. Indyk. We didn't need to be told, Mr. Chairman. I think
    we are very much aware of the budget caps and particularly of
    the caps on foreign assistance. The President was asked by the
    Prime Minister of Israel and Chairman Arafat to assist in
    defraying the cost associated with the implementation of Wye
    and other security-related costs when it comes to Israel's
    defense. And that is something that the President committed to
    consult with Congress about trying to achieve, and this is what
    we are doing here in terms of coming up and proposing this.
        However, precisely because of our understanding of the
    budget ceiling, we have not presented this as an emergency
    supplemental that would not be offset. On the contrary, we have
    come up with a full package of offsets.
        Senator Stevens. Well, I would encourage you to find some
    way to have some consultation with those of us who have the
    responsibility to live up to the budget agreement, which the
    President signed into law. I think that is our basic problem.
        We had the same problem with the supplemental. We just did
    not have offsets for the Wye Agreement. If we had realistic
    offsets, we would have put the whole agreement funding in the
    supplemental. We were only able to deal with a portion of that
    agreement, which caused the offset problem.
        I think it misleads a lot of people worldwide to enter into
    agreements that on their face are beyond the limits of the
    budget agreement that is a matter of law. We live under that
    law for another 2 years. The chairman of the Budget Committee
    is right here. He can tell you. He is chairman, he was ranking
    member, but he can tell us even more than I about the process
    of satisfying such agreements that are made without regard to
    the current year's limitations on expenditures.
        It makes some of us appear to be enemies of the process
    that we very much support. I think I feel more aggravated about
    that than anything else. But I would urge you to tell them we
    would like to know. I think in a process like this since there
    is disagreements between the Senate and the House on one hand,
    with our CBO process, and the Office of Management and Budget
    process, on how some of these things are scored. Before we lead
    people in other countries to believe the money is available,
    there ought to be an agreement where that money is going to
    come from otherwise there is going to be a terrible letdown if
    we are not able to fund the Wye Agreement. Right now, I have
    got to tell you, I cannot find the money to fund it.
        Senator Lautenberg. Mr. Chairman, I----
        Senator Specter. Senator Lautenberg, we have to go ahead
    with the hearing. Thank you, Mr. Chairman; thank you, Senator
    Stevens.
        Before moving to the questions on terrorism, we are going
    to have 5-minute rounds. We have a very, very extensive list of
    witnesses, so we are going to have to proceed. We did not
    interrupt the Secretary because he did cover some other
    subjects of very substantial importance, but if we are to
    conclude this hearing before 1 o'clock, which is the outside
    time, we are going to have to move in accordance with the time
    limitations.
        Before taking up the question of terrorism, which is a
    central point of our hearing, you have raised the issue of aid
    to Israel generally as well as aid to the Palestinians and
    Jordan generally. The Government of Israel has initiated a
    program of trying to reduce its request for U.S. economic
    assistance, and that is obviously a difficult question. The
    administration, a year after that Israel had made the proposal,
    is still engaged in discussions with the Government of Israel
    over the plan. As I understand the figures, I am trying to get
    this confirmed, the Senate forwarded a budget which has deeper
    cuts by some $150 million than the Israeli plan had envisioned.
        It would be very helpful to this subcommittee in looking at
    your budget request for you to conclude your discussions with
    Israel and to give us your judgment as to those. I do not want
    to go into the question in any great detail because there are
    so many more focus questions which we have here today, but if
    you could give us a response in writing, Mr. Secretary, I would
    appreciate it.
        [The information follows:]

        In late January 1998, Israeli Finance Minister Yaacov Ne'eman began
    discussions with Members of Congress and Administration officials on a
    proposal that would gradually reduce Israel's annual $1.2 billion
    economic assistance to zero, while phasing in a $600 million increase
    in military assistance over the same period. We welcomed the Israeli
    government's initiative and have been working closely with Israel and
    the Congress to further develop the concept.
        We agreed that it was time to adjust the level of assistance,
    however, negotiations continue on the exact funding levels for each
    year. The Administration has critical funding requirements for the next
    two years within limited budgetary resources. We have asked Israel to
    consider a reduction proposal that would include slightly increased
    reductions in the next two years, followed by a more gentle glidepath
    during the following years. Discussions continue between the
    Administration and the Government of Israel on this proposal.
        The Israeli proposal calls for some increases in FMF to be made in
    the form of off-shore procurement (OSP), as opposed to direct purchases
    of U.S.-sourced equipment. We understand there may be Congressional
    concerns about this aspect of the Israeli proposal, and are carefully
    studying the implications. We have asked the Israelis for programmatic
    justifications of additional OSP and are taking those into account
    while formulating our position.
        As Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu told a joint session of
    Congress, there is no greater tribute to America's long-standing
    economic aid than Israel's achievement of economic independence.

        Mr. Indyk. Mr. Chairman, if you will just allow me to
    correct one thing very quickly, it is not $150 million extra.
    It is $30 million extra. Israel suggested that its ESF should
    be cut by $120 million. We are suggesting it should be cut by
    $150 million.
        Senator Specter. OK, so the total cut is $150 million
    instead of the difference we have used.

                      israeli and palestinian cooperation

        Mr. Richard, let me move to the question as to the
    cooperation which we have had from both Israel and the
    Palestinians. I am informed that the FBI has encountered
    difficulties in obtaining Palestinian cooperation with their
    investigation, and I alluded earlier to a letter from Acting
    Assistant Attorney General Sutin that the Israelis were
    delaying in complying with the Department of Justice request
    for documents in October 1996.
        I would like for you to supply the subcommittee with
    details on compliance.
        [The information follows:]
                      Israeli and Palestinian Cooperation
        In October 1996, the Department of Justice, via the Department of
    State, submitted a Diplomatic Note to Israel requesting judicial
    assistance relating to those cases in which Americans have been victims
    of terrorist acts in that region. We requested, among other things,
    information such as investigative and forensic reports and witness
    statements pertinent to the ongoing FBI investigations into terrorist
    acts in that region. The Department made periodic inquiries concerning
    when a response would be forthcoming to the judicial assistance
    request. In February 1998, the Department of Justice received a
    response from the Israeli Administrative Judge advising that, because
    of national security considerations, the government of Israel would be
    unable to fully comply with our request.
        In March 1998, a delegation led by Deputy Assistant Attorney Mark
    Richard, consisting of representatives from the Department of Justice,
    including the prosecutor and FBI agents handling these cases, and the
    Department of State met with Israeli officials regarding these
    incidents and sought to obtain information concerning evidence the
    Israelis had developed. Members of this delegation also visited with
    officials of the Palestinian Authority for the purpose of eliciting
    pertinent information they might possess. As a result of these
    meetings, the Israeli officials produced to the delegation numerous
    documents that were translated and are being analyzed. Furthermore, the
    Palestinian Authority produced certain information as well.
        In October 1998, an investigative team comprised of the FBI agents
    and prosecutors returned to Israel to pursue leads on these matters and
    gather additional information from Israeli investigators. Israeli
    officials tendered voluminous materials to the FBI on these cases and
    advised they would address our investigative needs. Since then, the FBI
    has been in periodic contact with Israeli officials in Israel and
    Washington, DC, on these cases, and the FBI agents returned to Israel
    on April 10 to conduct more investigative interviews, including
    interviews with individuals in Israeli prisons who were responsible for
    these attacks. This most recent trip also included several meetings
    with Palestinian security officials, a necessary prerequisite to
    meeting and interviewing Palestinian witnesses and law enforcement
    officials and obtaining additional evidence under Palestinian control.
    We anticipate additional visits to Israel by American investigative
    personnel in the near future.

        Senator Specter. My view is that that is absolutely
    mandatory that we have cooperation from both sides when we make
    factual requests, and in the context where we are making very
    large allocations of funding, speaking for myself, I am not
    going to support the funding for anybody who does not comply
    with our request for information because that is an
    indispensable prerequisite for our judging whether we ought to
    be making those allocations.
        We have some 10 Palestinian suspects who have not been
    extradited, and we are going to have an obvious problem in
    getting through all that today. What I want to focus on are the
    suspects related to the victims who are here today. I am going
    to ask both Mr. Richard and Mr. Indyk to stay with us during
    the course of this hearing to respond to questions which arise
    if you possibly can, so that we can boil down and focus on the
    issues we have.
        We are going to need from you, Mr. Richard, details on why
    extradition has not been requested on others. But let me call
    your attention to a specific item that the suspect in the
    murder of American David Boim, Amjad Hinawi, confessed to his
    role in the killing in open court in the Palestinian Authority.
        He sought in a mitigation to say that he drove the car but
    did not realize his friend on the passenger side would shoot
    people. The Palestinian Authority sentenced the defendant to 10
    years in prison, but there were reports that he has been
    released.
        Where you have the driver of a car, there is as much guilt
    attached there as there is to the action of shooting, and it
    may go to the issue of sentencing. A representative of the U.S.
    Consulate who speaks fluent Arabic was present at the trial and
    heard the confession. Is not this confession a sufficient basis
    for an indictment?

                                  indictments

        I am going to go through the list of 10 with you. We are
    really going to have to respond in writing to them. But with
    that kind of evidence in hand, why has there been no
    indictment?
        Mr. Richard. Well, as I alluded to in my statement, I mean,
    we have to judge the desirability of any prosecution by our
    standards. The question about the voluntariness, the
    corroboration of that confession----
        Senator Specter. Voluntariness? It was open court, Mr.
    Richard.
        Mr. Richard. The question of the process in which the
    confession, if you will, was obtained becomes relevant.
        Senator Specter. It was in open court, Mr. Richard.
        Mr. Richard. I appreciate that, but, I mean, there is a
    question of what led up to it, the prior treatment, and the
    like, which may be relevant. The mere----
        Senator Specter. Well, what was the prior treatment?
        Mr. Richard. I am suggesting to you that that becomes
    relevant to determination of whether it is going to be
    admissible in the courtroom here, but----
        Senator Specter. Do you know this case? Are you able to
    speak factually about this case?
        Mr. Richard. Well, I mean, I have the facts available, but
    I will say this much, that we are not really going to be in a
    position to lay out in the kind of detail that I suspect you
    are looking for, you know, the precise information regarding
    each of these cases.
        Senator Specter. I am not talking about each of these
    cases. I am talking about this case. I am making an inquiry as
    to whether you know the facts sufficient to comment. When you
    have a confession which is made in open court, I would suggest
    to you that unless there is some trickery or coercion or deceit
    which has induced it, this is not a question of coerced
    confession. It is not a question of Miranda warnings. This is
    Israel. But when there's a confession in open court, my
    experience tells me, and I have had a little, that that is
    admissible.
        My red light is on. We are not going to conclude the
    hearing if even the chairman ignores the red light, so I am not
    going to do so.
        Senator Specter. Senator Lautenberg.
        Senator Lautenberg. I thank the chairman. I have to go back
    to the budget on the floor, so I will just take these couple
    minutes. I regret I am not going to be able to be here through
    the testimony of Mr. Flatow or Mrs. Eisenfeld but I want to ask
    Ambassador Indyk, do you think that the civil penalties that we
    were able to have awarded to Mr. Flatow serve as a deterrent to
    terrorist groups, for state-sponsored terrorism?
        Mr. Indyk. I'm sorry, I missed the last part.
        Senator Lautenberg. Serves as a deterrent, these penalties
    can serve as a deterrent to state-sponsored terrorism groups.
        Mr. Indyk. Well, I think we have to look at the record
    since the judgment was made. We do not see a direct connection
    between the judgment and the change in behavior. In this case
    we are talking about Iran. A judgment that was made against the
    Government of Iran; it concerns their support for Palestine's
    Islamic Jihad, which is the organization that was responsible
    for the very untimely and tragic death of Alisa Flatow. It
    continues to get support from Iran. We do not see a change in
    that.
        Senator Lautenberg. I am going to interrupt you, Mr.
    Ambassador, because of the time limit. Let me say this. I think
    that part of the problem is that the impact of the award has
    not been felt, and as a consequence, I think, it is almost
    impossible to measure.
        I ask the question because it is my belief that it would
    serve as a deterrent. We are talking about a court award, Mr.
    Chairman, that was a quarter of a billion dollars. Mr. Anderson
    has also indicated his intent to file a claim.
        I would ask you, please, to review with the administration
    what it is that they can do to facilitate the Flatow efforts to
    collect the damages against Iran. These people are not
    interested in money. I know them very well. They are interested
    in making sure that other families are protected to the extent
    that we can protect them.
        I want to also ask, Mr. Ambassador: The National Security
    Council staff, State and Justice Department officials have not
    followed through on an important issue the President made a
    commitment on when Steve Flatow met with him in early February.
    I would therefore put the question to you: Is the
    administration prepared to release rental income from the
    Iranian Embassy to help satisfy the judgment that it holds
    against Iran as the state sponsor of the terrorist act that
    killed his daughter?
        Mr. Indyk. I looked into this question, Senator Lautenberg,
    and the answer that I have been given is not likely to satisfy
    you, but it is the only one I can give you, which is that this
    is the subject of litigation between the U.S. Government and
    Mr. Flatow, and the problem with--Justice has filed a brief in
    this case. We would be glad to provide you with the position
    that the Department of Justice has taken in this regard.
        Let me say beyond that that I am therefore prevented from
    commenting on this particular issue. We have sought to identify
    assets that could be used for attachment by the Flatows and
    others in these cases, and we will continue to try to point
    them in that direction where it does not conflict with our
    other obligations such as under the Vienna Convention or on
    diplomatic property.
        Senator Lautenberg. The biggest problem seems to be access.
    We have met with several people going from Sandy Berger on.
    Each one made a commitment, frankly, as I heard it personally,
    to make records available. The Treasury Department has its
    interest obviously in terms of the Iranian assets that that
    they are responsible for protecting.
        But I would ask, please, that you see to the extent you can
    that the Flatows and their representatives and the Eisenfelds
    have as much access as possible to records we have. That is the
    only way we are going to be able to see whether or not we can
    deter these acts before they occur. Thank you.
        Mr. Indyk. I will be glad to do that, Senator. I have, of
    course, not been personally involved with this, but if they
    would like to meet with me, I will be glad to take this up.
        Senator Lautenberg. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Specter. Thank you very much, Senator Lautenberg.
    In making the request that you remain, Mr. Secretary and
    Attorney General Richard, I do so because we are going to be
    getting into some of the specifics. Secretary Indyk did not
    really get into the details of the terrorist attack matters.
    This question which Senator Lautenberg has raised, as I
    understand it, there has been a waiver of that provision of law
    with respect to the verdict in the Flatow case. I believe that
    the members of this subcommittee and the full Congress are
    going to be looking very closely at this question in evaluating
    the aid, and we raise the question both as to Israeli
    cooperation as well as Palestinian cooperation.
        What I want to do here, I want to hear from the next four
    witnesses who will be talking as victims, and then I want to
    come to grips, Mr. Richard, with what has happened to the
    suspects in these cases. I appreciate the fact that you may not
    be in a position to comment on all the details now as to why
    there has not been extradition, but you may be in a position to
    comment about why there have not been rewards offered as there
    have been in other cases. Mr. Secretary, I think it would be
    helpful for you to hear what we are dealing with on the Flatow
    case and others, so we would ask you to stay.
        Mr. Indyk. I am in a very awkward position here, sir,
    because it was expressly communicated to me that we would give
    our testimony and then we would be released. I have other
    scheduled meetings immediately after this.
        Senator Specter. Well, you are not under subpoena yet.
        Mr. Indyk. And so I feel very awkward about it. But I am
    not going to be able to stay, and I am sorry that----
        Senator Specter. How long can you stay?
        Mr. Indyk. I will just ask my staff to check and I will let
    you know in a moment. I am told I have to be back in the office
    at 12:30, so I have to leave here by 12:15.
        Senator Specter. That would be helpful. I appreciate that.
    To the extent that you can stay until 12:15, that would be very
    helpful.
        Mr. Indyk. Would you allow me, sir, since I did not make an
    opening presentation, to make a few comments about this
    particular issue of the American----
        Senator Specter. Well, OK. I would like you to be brief. I
    would like to hear these victims. But go ahead, Mr. Secretary.
        Mr. Indyk. First of all, I want to make clear that the
    issue of bringing to justice terrorist suspects accused of
    involvement in killing American citizens is a high priority for
    the administration. It has been a subject on President
    Clinton's agenda.
        In talks with Chairman Arafat for a number of years
    beginning back in their meeting at Sharm el-Sheikh in 1995, the
    Secretary of State himself, Dennis Ross, and our Counsel
    General in Jerusalem, John Herbst have constantly raised this
    issue with the Palestinians. I would say in terms of my own
    views on this that Alisa Flatow, Matt Eisenfeld, Sara Duker,
    Joanne Davenny, and David Boim were all killed on my watch as
    U.S. Ambassador in Israel. In fact, Alisa was killed on the day
    that I was entering my credentials. I will not ever forget. And
    so I personally take it very seriously that we need to find
    ways to bring these people to justice.
        As Attorney General Richard explained to you, we do not
    have at the moment, I think you are very much aware, any
    indictments against any of these suspects, so in the meantime
    our focus is on making sure that they are apprehended.
        Now, in this regard, I would just like to point out that
    there are four categories here. The first are terrorist
    suspects that are in Israeli custody, and there are a large
    number of those, over 20. The second category are those who are
    dead, mainly because they blew themselves up in terrorist acts.
        The third category are those that are in custody of the
    Palestinian Authority. There are, according to our belief,
    seven in custody. We have physically verified that six are in
    fact in custody. This has been done in the last month by
    officials from the Consulate. We are endeavoring to verify the
    seventh. We have not yet been able to do so.
        There are eight fugitives believed to be in the areas under
    the control of Palestinian Authority. These are not, to the
    best of our knowledge, people who are walking around free. They
    are at large and they are being pursued by the Palestinian
    Authority.
        In one particular case that I have been very focused on
    over the years, Mohammed Dayf, who was responsible, we believe,
    for the killing of Nachshon Wachsman and has been the subject
    of the highest level of intervention by the President and other
    various officials in this administration, there was recently a
    serious effort to apprehend him which was unfortunately
    unsuccessful. But we have good reason to believe from our own
    sources that the Palestinian Authority did make a serious
    effort to apprehend him in recent months.
        Senator Specter. Mr. Richard.

                            investigative priorities

        Mr. Richard. If I may just make a couple of general
    remarks, we have focused in terms of our priorities, our
    investigative priorities, on individuals who remain fugitives
    or are still awaiting trial. There is a variety of reasons for
    that, including the fact that to the extent that Israel has
    already prosecuted individuals, the current extradition treaty
    would serve as a significant barrier, if you will, to
    reextradition for the same offense. Moreover, in terms of being
    able to get them out of custody, Israeli custody, there is no
    easy mechanism at the present time. Our principal efforts,
    though, in terms of----
        Senator Specter. No easy mechanism to get them out of
    Israeli custody?
        Mr. Richard. That is correct.
        Senator Specter. Israelis will not turn them over to the
    United States?
        Mr. Richard. The treaty itself, the extradition treaty with
    Israel, if you have somebody currently convicted of that crime
    serving time in Israel, and we seek an extradition under the
    treaty of that individual who is serving time in Israel for
    that same crime, extradited for the same crime, one, the treaty
    would not provide for that. It is like a ``non bis in idem''
    clause, which is a double jeopardy issue.
        Second, the treaty does not have a mechanism until the
    sentence is completed for that.
        Senator Specter. Mr. Richard, may we defer that. We are
    talking about people in custody in Israeli detention, I would
    be delighted and interested to hear. There is technically no
    double jeopardy. You can be prosecuted federally and also in
    Pennsylvania, as you and I both know. But I am on a different--
    we are on a different question.
        We are on a question of suspects who are being held by the
    Palestinian Authority, and we have a law which authorizes
    prosecution in the United States. I would like to get to that
    point, if I may.

                         Additional committee questions

        Senator Specter. There will be some additional questions
    which will be submiited for your response in the record.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                              Department of State
               Questions Submitted by Senator Christopher S. Bond
        Question. The policy of land for peace has been the framework for
    all the agreements signed. Hasn't the Israeli government implemented
    its obligation to withdraw from land under the first phase of Wye as
    the Palestinians implemented their commitments?
        Answer. Both the Wye and Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandums obligate the
    Israelis and Palestinians to take specific actions by specified dates.
    In the Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum the sides established a new timeline
    and agreed that the Israelis would undertake three specific further
    redeployments. The first two have been completed. The remaining one,
    scheduled for January 20, 2000, is currently under discussion between
    the two sides.
        Question. Should the Israelis be asked to relinquish more land
    before the Palestinians implement their follow on obligations?
        Answer. The Wye and Sharm memoranda impose obligations on both
    sides. The United States believes both sides should live up to their
    commitments, and work together to solve problems that come up in the
    course of implementation.
        Question. Has the PA coordinated with the U.S. when releasing
    prisoners and could you provide any examples?
        Answer. We have no information that the PA released any individuals
    held in connection with the killing of American citizens. We also
    believe the Palestinians are taking their security responsibilities
    seriously.
        Question. Has the PA outlawed organizations of military, terrorist,
    or violent character as required by Wye?
        Answer. The Wye River Memorandum provided for a U.S.-Palestinian
    committee to review and evaluate information pertinent to the decisions
    on prosecutions, punishment, or other legal measures which affect the
    status of individuals suspected of abetting or perpetrating acts of
    violence and terror. In the Wye River Memorandum the Palestinian side
    agreed to inform the U.S. of ``actions it has taken to outlaw all
    organizations (or wings of organizations as appropriate) of a military,
    terrorist, or violent character and their support structure and to
    prevent them from operating in areas under its jurisdiction.'' Among
    the steps the Palestinians have pointed to is the March 3, 1996 PA
    decree banning paramilitary organizations. Prime Minister Barak,
    Foreign Minister Levy, and other Israeli officials have subsequently
    praised the PA for improvements in its security cooperation with
    Israel, while stressing to the Palestinians that more can be done in
    dismantling the terrorist's infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza.
    United States representatives have made the same point to PA leaders.
        Question. Can you provide even one case of the PA enforcing the
    anti-incitement decrees, and how do you justify Mr. Arafat's continuing
    threats of ntifada and having Israelis drink from the Dead Sea?
        Answer. The PA clearly must make a much greater effort to enforce
    its anti-incitement decrees. Incitement is an issue we take extremely
    seriously. Incitement and inflammatory language is inconsistent with
    peace and must be eliminated. We have raised this issue, repeatedly,
    including the related issue of ethnic stereotyping and inciteful
    material in textbooks, with senior Palestinian representatives. The
    sides are working bilaterally, and with our support in the trilateral
    (US/Palestinian/Israel) committee established in the Wye River
    Memorandum, to address the issue of incitement, inflammatory language,
    and stereotyping, including anti-Semitism, from education, the media,
    and public discourse. The PA has begun a five-year program to replace
    school textbooks and eliminate inciteful material.
        Question. Have you seen any current official Israeli maps which
    include Gaza and the entire region of the West Bank as part of its
    national borders? Why do we permit the Palestinian Authority to ignore
    the existence of the Israeli state as depicted on official
    paraphernalia?
        Answer. The United States has not conducted a detailed survey of
    either Israeli or Palestinian maps. On the general issue of mutual
    recognition, PLO Chairman Arafat's letter to Norwegian Foreign Minister
    Holst in September 1994 recognized Israel's right to exist within
    secure and recognized borders and one of the foundations of the agreed
    negotiating framework is U.N. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338
    which reaffirm this principle. In December 1998 the Palestinian
    National Council again endorsed a decision to remove all language that
    called for the destruction of Israel from the PLO Charter.
        Question. What specifically, has the PA done to terminate radio and
    television programs containing virulent anti-peace process rhetoric?
        Answer. The PA must do more in this regard. The PA has made its
    views and support of the peace process quite clear, in both word and
    deed. That said, we have raised, and continue to raise, with senior
    Palestinian officials rhetoric or language that we regard as
    inflammatory, inciteful, or anti-Semitic. The Palestinian leadership
    has made clear its views that Israel has the right to exist, and that
    peace is the only viable option for the Palestinian people.
        Question. Does the State Department believe that the planners,
    instigators, and facilitators of terrorist incidents were less
    responsible for terrorist incidents than those who carried out
    terrorist operations?
        Answer. The Security Annex to the Israeli-Palestinian Interim
    Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip provides that both sides will
    ``apprehend, investigate and prosecute perpetrators and all other
    persons directly or indirectly involved in acts of terrorism, violence
    and incitement.'' The State Department has made implementation of this
    provision a high priority in its discussions with the parties.
                                     ______

             Questions Submitted by Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell
        Question. American Citizens killed in Terrorist attacks in
    Israel.--Israel has identified 20 Palestinians who are suspected to
    have played a role in terrorist attacks on Israel in which 12 American
    citizens have been killed in the last five years. Under the Anti-
    Terrorism Act of 1986, the U.S. may prosecute foreign nationals who
    kill American citizens abroad. However, the administration maintains
    that there is not yet sufficient evidence to indict these suspects.
        (A) What are the administration's current efforts to bring about
    indictments against these suspects?
        (B) How cooperative has the Palestinian Authority been in these
    efforts?
        (C) Have the Palestinians outlawed all organizations of a military,
    terrorist, or violent charter as required by the Wye Memorandum?
        (D) What are the collaborative efforts between the Departments of
    State and Justice in the effort to indict these Palestinian suspects?
        Answer. In March 1998, an interagency delegation composed of
    representatives from the Department of State and Justice, including the
    Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), and the National Security
    Council traveled to the region to discuss these cases In October 1998
    Department of Justice representatives visited the region again for in
    depth discussions and gathered additional information. An FBI team
    visited this spring and again this summer to follow up on these cases
    with Israel and the Palestinians. The FBI is planning additional visits
    in connection with these cases.
        During these visits and other discussions the Government of Israel
    provided information on a number of individuals in connection with
    various incidents involving U.S. citizens. The PA provided information
    about its efforts to apprehend and convict terrorists suspected of
    killing American citizens. The FBI has requested further information
    from the Israelis and Palestinians.
        Our efforts on these cases are ongoing. We will continue to raise
    these cases on a regular basis with the Government of Israel and the
    Palestinian Authority.
        The Palestinians have shown the willingness and ability to arrest
    people involved in terrorist incidents. They have arrested some of
    those suspected of involvement in the killings of Americans.
        Question. Fate of Missing Israeli Soldiers.--Assistant Secretary
    Indyk, on June 11, 1982, Zachary Baumel, an American citizen and
    sergeant in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) and his tank crew were
    captured by forces linked to the Palestinian Liberation Organization
    (PLO) following the battle of Sultan Yaqub in northern Lebanon. Sgt.
    Baumel and his two IDF comrades, Zvi Fedlman and Yehuda Katz were then
    paraded through the Syrian capital of Damascus and were never seen
    again.
        For over sixteen years, the Syrian government and the leadership of
    the PLO have failed to cooperate in the effort to determine their fate.
    For the last five years, no new information concerning these men has
    been forthcoming. I have recently introduced legislation which requires
    the State Department to raise this issue with the Syrian government and
    leaders of the Palestinian Authority and provide the Congress with a
    report on the information that has been uncovered.
        (A) In 1993, Yasser Arafat produced half of Zachary Baumel's dog
    tag and indicated that additional information concerning his status
    would be forthcoming. Is this the most recent information that the
    State Department has received from either the Palestinian Authority or
    the Syrian government concerning the fate of Sgt. Baumel and his
    comrades?
        (B) Please provide the committee with any information that the
    State Department has concerning the whereabouts or condition of Sgt.
    Baumel and his IDF comrades.
        (C) What actions has the State Department taken to date to
    facilitate the recovery of Israeli POW/MIAs?
        Answer. The United States remains determined to pursue every
    concrete lead to ascertain the fate of Israel's MIAs, including Zachary
    Baumel, a U.S.-Israeli dual citizen. We are in close contact with the
    Israeli Government and the families of the MIAs to help resolve this
    important issue. The President and Secretary Albright have raised this
    issue repeatedly with officials at the highest levels in Syria. We have
    also discussed it in the past with senior Palestinian officials.
        We sympathize with the pain of all the families of the missing
    soldiers and with their determination to continue the search for their
    sons. Let me assure you that we will continue our efforts to help them.
                           NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

    STATEMENT OF STEPHEN FLATOW, FATHER OF ALISA FLATOW,
                WEST ORANGE, NJ
        Senator Specter. Let me call the next panel of witnesses.
    We need a couple of extra chairs. I would like to have Mr.
    Stephen Flatow, Vicki Eisenfeld, Diana Campuzano, and Mr.
    Nathan Lewin, if you folks would step forward.
        Mr. Indyk. Should we stay here?
        Senator Specter. I found when we have overlapping issues,
    one of the best things to do is to listen and comment. It gets
    to the point a lot faster than coming back.
        We welcome you here and we know of the tremendous suffering
    which has been sustained by the families of these victims, and
    the business of extraterritorial jurisdiction is something
    which we have grappled with mightily.
        It was only in 1984 the Federal law comprehended
    reimbursing people who were either kidnap victims or hostage
    victims, and then in 1985 we had the killings of U.S. citizens
    in the Rome and Vienna airports, and I introduced legislation
    in 1986 which was passed, the Terrorist Prosecution Act, making
    it a violation of U.S. law, and that is what we are on at the
    present time.
        To the extent that your statements are brief, we will have
    more time to question Mr. Indyk, and we will have enough time
    to question Mr. Richard.
        Mr. Flatow, we welcome you here. We know that your
    daughter, Alisa, at the age of 20, was a student at Brandeis
    University, one of seven people killed in an April 9, 1995, bus
    bombing in Kfar Darom on the Gaza Strip.
        Mr. Flatow. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for the
    opportunity to be here this morning. I would also like to go on
    record thanking those Members of Congress on both sides of the
    aisle who have been so supportive to us in the past 4 years.
        Today I prefer not to dwell on the loss of Alisa's life but
    our response to that loss, and the losses of other American
    families. Please understand that we have never sought revenge
    for Alisa's death, we have only been seeking justice over the
    past 4 years, pursuing her killers and those who sponsored the
    terrorist attack which took her life.
        Mr. Richard referred before to the lack of Palestinian
    cooperation with the FBI. That did happen again with Alisa's
    case back in April of 1995 when the FBI was rebuffed. I do not
    think there is anything wrong with one police force cooperating
    with another country's police force in the investigation of a
    homicide, and as far as I know, no public protest was ever
    lodged by our Government with the Palestinian Authority over
    this issue.
        In 1997 with the encouragement of the President of the
    United States and the passage of the Antiterrorism and
    Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, our family filed a lawsuit
    against the Islamic Republic of Iran as a financial backer of
    the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and recovered a $247 million
    judgment.
        Our experts will tell you, Senator, quite clearly that
    recovery on that judgment will be a deterrent to future
    terrorist attacks and the funding of such terrorist attacks. It
    is a well known fact in academic circles and in practical
    circles in the field, if you will.
        However, I do not wish to dwell on that case. I would
    rather talk today about a confession I have to make, and that
    is I now understand what the phrase means that ignorance is
    bliss. Until a few short months ago I thought that the attack
    which took Alisa's life was a small circle of fanatics. Little
    did I understand how wide that circle was and how many people
    were actually involved in the planning and the execution of the
    attack.
        Two years ago I had the opportunity to meet with Dr. Nabil
    Sha'ath, planning minister of the Palestinian Authority, who
    expressed his condolences on the loss of Alisa's life and his
    willingness to cooperate with our family as we proceeded to
    seek justice.
        Unfortunately I tried on several occasions to reach Dr.
    Sha'ath by fax and by letter as we prepared our lawsuit against
    the Iranians, but he was--there was no response coming from the
    Palestinian Authority at that time.
        The problem as I see it does not lie with the perpetrators
    being anonymous. They are not anonymous. The problem, in my
    opinion, lies with the Palestinian Authority's willingness to
    turn a blind eye to these killers in their midst.
        As our Government moves along, investigating Alisa's death,
    it seems to be clear that justice will be delayed unless the
    Palestinian Authority moves now to arrest all of those
    responsible for Alisa's death.
        Unfortunately, our Government is not without fault, either,
    sir. While the State of Israel has requested transfer of
    suspects in Alisa's case, the United States has not done so.
    Justice in the Palestinian Authority, in my opinion, is spotty,
    if not an outright embarrassment to the concept of justice.
        I must also question why the United States is able to
    extradite killers when the death involves American oil company
    employees in Pakistan or a shooting outside of CIA
    headquarters. I also have to question why the Department of
    State's incident Web site, called the Heroes Home Page, is
    devoid of any reference to American lives lost in Israel to
    Palestinian Arab terrorism.
        Why does the State Department post rewards when it comes to
    killings in Africa or in Pakistan all around the world, but not
    when that killing takes place in Israel? I do not want to
    believe for a second that our Government's position is that
    Alisa's life was worth one penny less than any other American's
    life.
        Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that our Government
    does not want to force the hand of the Palestinian Authority at
    this time. Maybe our Government does not want to risk a
    confrontation with the PA over potential refusal to turn over
    killers for trial here.
        I must then ask what kind of partnership is the United
    States going to have with the Palestinian Authority. Will it be
    all give by the United States of our money and our diplomatic
    recognition? What will be the quid pro quo from the PA? Will it
    continue to harbor terrorists? Will it continue to turn a blind
    eye to this cancer? What kind of authority are we creating when
    we do not hold the PA to the same standards as we hold the rest
    of the world when it deals with terrorism?
        The price of leadership, Mr. Chairman, and a spot in the
    family of nations, demands choosing between political
    expediency and doing that which is morally and legally correct.
    Perhaps the PA does have the authority and the courage to
    arrest those responsible for the deaths of Americans. We will
    never know if we do not ask them to do so.
        I know the names of Alisa's killers. I have them here with
    me today. It hurts me to know that they are in Gaza, walking
    the streets.

                               prepared statement

        Senator Specter. I am sorry to interrupt you, Mr. Flatow. I
    have just been notified we are going to start three votes at 12
    o'clock, which means that I have to leave this podium at 12:05,
    and that is going to take the better part of an hour when we
    start them, so we are going to have to move ahead. I am very,
    very sorry. We will make your full statement a part of the
    record.
        Mr. Flatow. Thank you, sir.
        [The statement follows:]
                    Prepared Statement of Stephen M. Flatow
        I thank you for the opportunity to be here this morning. Indeed, I
    wish to thank publicly those members of the Congress, from both sides
    of the aisle, who have recognized our family's pain and have become a
    staunch allies in our fight to bring to justice those responsible for
    the attack that took my daughter Alisa's life.
        Today, I prefer not to dwell on the loss of Alisa's life but to
    focus on several aspects of the response to my loss and the losses of
    other American families.
        On the day of Alisa's funeral when I was asked if I wanted revenge,
    I said, ``No, I was only interested in justice.'' In the almost four
    years since Alisa's death, our family has been involved in what has
    become a monumental effort to bring Alisa's killers to the bar of
    justice.
        While the person who drove the explosive laden van into the side of
    the public bus in which my daughter was riding was killed in the
    explosion, those who masterminded the attack, those who provided the
    material with which to build the bomb, those who recruited the bomber,
    and those who provided the financial and moral support for the attack
    have been beyond my reach.
        Immediately after the attack, pursuant to existing U.S. law, the
    President ordered the Federal Bureau of Investigation to travel to
    Israel to investigate the attack. Yet, to my chagrin and I am sure is
    that of the Federal agents charged with the investigation of Alisa's
    death, the Palestinian Authority refused to cooperate with our
    government's representatives. No reason has ever been publicly given by
    the Palestinian Authority for this snub and, to my knowledge, no public
    protest was ever lodged by the United States with the Palestinian
    Authority.
        In 1997, with the encouragement of the President of the United
    States, and utilizing provisions of the Anti-terrorism and Effective
    Death Penalty Act of 1996, our family filed suit against the Islamic
    Republic of Iran as the financial backer of Palestine Islamic Jihad
    which carried out the attack. I wish I could sit here and tell you that
    the case is going well but I cannot.
        Although I have obtained a $247.5 million judgment against the
    Islamic Republic of Iran, my own government has stymied me in my
    efforts to seize Iranian assets located in the United States. This is a
    battle that I will continue to wage.
        On a sadder note and what brings me here today is my confession to
    you that I now truly understand the meaning of the phrase ``ignorance
    is bliss.'' Little did I understand in 1995 how wide was the circle of
    Palestinian perpetrators of the attack and how little I actually knew
    about the attack. That lack of information led me down the path of
    believing that everyone was doing what they could to see Alisa's
    killers brought to justice.
        Over the past few months I have come to learn that Alisa was not
    killed by one man acting alone but by a well-organized group. I have
    recently learned that some of those involved in the attack were
    arrested and then released by the Palestinian Authority and that others
    have never been picked up by the PA security service. Thus, not only do
    they remain unpunished for their role in Alisa's death but they are
    free to strengthen Palestinian Islamic Jihad and, heaven forbid,
    conduct other terrorist operations.
        Yet, two years ago I met with Dr. Nabil Sha'ath, Minister of
    Planning in the Palestinian Authority. We had a very cordial meeting
    and Dr. Sha'ath assured me at the time of the PA's interest in the
    attack which took my daughter's life and that he was available to
    assist me when the need arose. Despite Palestinian protests of Iranian
    support for Palestinian terror groups, on several occasions during the
    course of my lawsuit against Iran, I reached out to Dr. Sha'ath to take
    him up on his offer of assistance but no response of any kind was ever
    received.
        The problem as I see it does not lie with the perpetrators being
    anonymous, they are well known. The problem lies with the Palestinian
    Authority's willingness to turn a blind eye to these killers in its
    midst. As our government moves along investigating Alisa's case, it
    seems clear to me that justice will continued to be delayed unless the
    Palestinian Authority moves now to arrest all those responsible for
    Alisa's death.
        Our government is not without fault either. While the government of
    the State of Israel has requested transfer of the suspects in Alisa's
    case, the United States has not done so. Justice in the Palestinian
    Authority system is spotty, if not an outright embarrassment to the
    concept of justice.
        I must question why the United States is able to extradite killers
    when it involves death at CIA headquarters or airplane bombing
    conspirators but lacks the ability to demand that the PA turn over
    killers of Americans living free in its jurisdiction.
        Why is the Department of State's Internet web site, the Heroes
    Homepage, devoid of any reference to American lives lost in Israel to
    Palestinian Arab terrorism?
        Why does the State Department post rewards when it comes to
    terrorist attacks involving American victims around the world except
    when that American is killed in Israel? I do not want to believe that
    my government believes my daughter's life was worth anything less than
    the life of a CIA employee or an employee of an American oil company.
        Perhaps the answer to our problem lies in the fact that our
    government does not want to force the Palestinian Authority's hand on
    this issue. Maybe our government does not want to risk a confrontation
    with the PA over a potential refusal to turn over killers for trial
    here. I must then ask what kind of partnership is the United States
    going to have with the PA? Will it be all give by the United States of
    our money and of our diplomatic recognition? What will be the quid pro
    quo by the PA? Will it continue to harbor terrorists? Will it continue
    to turn a blind eye to this cancer in its midst? What kind of authority
    are we creating when we do not hold the Palestinian Authority to the
    same standards that we hold the rest of the world?
        The price of leadership and a spot in the family of nations demands
    choosing between political expediency and doing that which is right.
    Perhaps the PA does have the courage to arrest those responsible for
    the deaths of Americans. But we will never know if we don't ask for the
    transfer of known killers to the United States.
        I know the names of Alisa's killers, I have them here in front of
    me. It hurts me to know that they are free to walk the streets of Gaza.
    But it hurts more that our own government may not be mounting a 100
    percent effort to bring these killers to justice.
    STATEMENT OF NATHAN LEWIN, ATTORNEY, WASHINGTON,
                DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
        Senator Specter. I would like to turn now to Mr. Nathan
    Lewin, who has a long resume which I am going to avoid. He is
    here representing the family of David Boim. Mr. Lewin, the
    floor is yours.
        Mr. Lewin. Thank you, Senator Specter. I have submitted an
    extended statement for the record. I would just like--I am here
    today to represent Joyce and Stanley Boim, who are our clients
    and who are residing in Israel and could not be here to testify
    in person about the murder of their son and the efforts that
    they have been making since that time to get the U.S.
    Government to prosecute the admitted participant in that
    murder.
        David Boim was a 17-year-old American, native born American
    who was learning at a yeshiva in Israel and was killed in a
    drive-by shooting in which Mr. Amjad Hinawi was allegedly the
    driver of the car and the person who did the shooting, who was
    subsequently released by the Palestinian Authority thereafter,
    was one of the suicide bombers who blew himself up at the Ben
    Yehuda mall which resulted in the deaths, I think, of 12
    people, and the wounding of 192. I am sorry, deaths of 7,
    including an American citizen, and the wounding of 192 people.
        Mr. Hinawi was prosecuted by the Palestinian Authority in
    February 1998 and in the course of that proceeding his
    confession was read in open court, and he acknowledged being in
    the car. He was convicted by the Palestinian court, but to this
    day the U.S. Department of Justice has still not indicted him
    for what is clearly a crime under American law, and this is
    totally inexplicable, and I submit totally inexcusable.
        In my time in the Department of Justice, when I was a
    prosecutor, I recall civil rights prosecution, for example
    there was a woman by the name of Viola Liuzzo. I do not know
    whether you will recall that, Senator Specter. She was a civil
    rights worker down South who was killed in a drive-by shooting.
    And the U.S. Department of Justice proceeded to prosecute in
    that case very vigorously.
        Here there is no question that Mr. Hinawi was in the car.
    He has acknowledged that. He has been convicted by the
    Palestinian Authority, and to this day the U.S. Department of
    Justice says we do not have enough evidence on which to indict
    this man.
        Now, I was a prosecutor years ago. I have been a defense
    counsel since then. If that admission and indeed that
    conviction in the court of the Palestinian Authority is not
    sufficient, I do not know what would be sufficient to overturn
    an indictment. Why it takes three visits by the Department of
    Justice personnel and the FBI to return an indictment of that
    case is a total----
        Senator Specter. Mr. Richard, will you sit down with Mr.
    Lewin in the course of the next week or two and talk to him
    about their case?
        Mr. Richard. I will be glad to.
        Mr. Lewin. We have in my prepared statement also outlined
    what we think are important civil remedies which we will be
    pursuing on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Boim with regard to this
    murder. They also were enacted by Congress precisely to allow
    prosecution of all those who participated in these events. That
    would include, we submit, those who financed terrorism and,
    indeed, even the Palestinian Authority for its release of
    personnel.
        Are we waiting for Mr. Hinawi, who apparently was released
    shortly after his arrest for a Muslim holiday? I have no idea
    whether he is among the six people who Secretary Indyk has said
    is now in custody. Our reports were that he was marching around
    free. Are we waiting for him to blow himself up as another
    suicide bomber and therefore make his case moot?
        Mr. Indyk. Amjad Hinawi has been verified as in detention
    by our people, in PA custody.
        Mr. Lewin. For a long period of time, Senator Specter, it
    was clear he was not. If he has been taken back into custody
    recently I think it has been because there was increased public
    attention on these cases, and so he has been brought back into
    custody. Whether he will be released again for some holiday and
    then find himself as a suicide bomber in some other case, I
    hope not.
        Senator Specter. We are going to ask Mr. Richard and Mr.
    Indyk to pursue these matters. We will not have time, as I have
    said, for the kind of dialogue that I had hoped for. But when
    the bells ring for the votes, that is the No. 1 responsibility
    of a Senator.
        Mr. Lewin. Well, let me just say in conclusion, Joyce and
    Stanley Boim are not political activists. They are the bereaved
    parents of a murdered 17-year-old American. They cannot
    understand why the Attorney General of the United States
    refuses to enforce laws that were passed by Congress to protect
    them and their family. This committee should demand that the
    Attorney General do her duty.
        Senator Specter. We are doing just that.
        Mr. Lewin. Thank you.
        [The statement follows:]
                       Prepared Statement of Nathan Lewin
        My name is Nathan Lewin. For the past thirty years I have practiced
    law in Washington, D.C. with the firm of Miller, Cassidy, Larroca &
    Lewin, which I joined in 1969. My practice involves trial and appellate
    litigation in federal and state courts throughout the country. I have
    also had the privilege of arguing 27 cases in the Supreme Court of the
    United States. Prior to entering private practice, I served in the
    Kennedy and Johnson administrations as an Assistant to the Solicitor
    General, Deputy Administrator of the Bureau of Security and Consular
    Affairs at the Department of State, and then, as a Deputy Assistant
    Attorney General in the Civil Rights Division of the Department of
    Justice. I have taught constitutional law and appellate advocacy at
    Harvard Law School, Georgetown Law School and the University of Chicago
    Law School. I am presently teaching at Columbia Law School and George
    Washington University Law School.
        I am appearing here today on behalf of my clients, Joyce and
    Stanley Boim. They are the parents of David Boim, a 17-year-old
    American citizen who was gunned down by HAMAS terrorists operating out
    of Palestinian-controlled territories in the West Bank and Gaza in
    1996. My testimony today concerns the legal theories that we are
    pursuing in an effort to hold liable those responsible for David's
    murder, and the difficulties we have encountered in pursuing those
    theories.
                              david boim's murder
        On May 13, 1996, David Boim, a native-born American citizen who was
    a student at a yeshiva in Israel, was killed by Palestinian terrorists
    while he waited at a bus stop near Beit El, Israel. The two attackers,
    travelling by car, first opened fire on a civilian bus, injuring two
    passengers. A few hundred yards later, the attackers resumed firing at
    a group of students waiting at a bus stop. One student, Yair Greenbaum,
    was wounded in the chest. David Boim was shot in the head and was
    pronounced dead an hour later. After killing David Boim, the terrorists
    lost control of their car and fled on foot towards Jalazun, in
    Palestinian-controlled territory.
        Amjad Hinawi, one of the two HAMAS members who had taken part in
    the shooting attack, was arrested and imprisoned temporarily by the
    Palestinian Authority police in early 1997. Israel officially requested
    Hinawi's transfer from the Palestinian Authority on September 22, 1991.
    Khaklil Tawfiq Al-Sharif, the other participant in the attack and
    murder of David Boim, was freed and subsequently blew himself up along
    with two other HAMAS suicide bombers at the Ben Yehuda mall in
    Jerusalem on September 4, 1997. That attack in a pedestrian mall killed
    7 (including a young girl who was an American citizen) and wounded 192,
    including several young American students, one of whom--Daniel Miller--
    is also represented by us.
        On February 17, 1998, a Palestinian Authority court sentenced
    Hinawi to ten years in prison at hard labor for David Boim's murder.
    Later that same month, Hinawi was granted leave from prison for the
    Muslim holiday of Id Al-Fitr. We do not know whether he has ever
    returned, although there is some indication that after there was some
    public attention focussed on him the Palestinian Authority rearrested
    him. The Palestinian Authority has not responded to Israel's request
    for transfer.
        The Boims are seeking justice for the murder of their son on two
    fronts. First, they are seeking the indictment of David Boim's killer
    as a prelude to his extradition to the United States to stand trial.
    The United States Criminal Code expressly provides for the prosecution
    of terrorists responsible for the murders of American citizens
    overseas. Thus far, however, the United States Department of Justice
    has failed to indict David's killer. As I will discuss in more detail,
    the Justice Department's refusal to do so is unconscionable. The United
    States should pursue David's killer as it would any murderer in the
    United States who flees abroad after he kills.
        Second, the Boims may pursue civil damages against the individuals
    and organizations who are responsible for David's death, directly or
    indirectly. United States law authorizes a private cause of action for
    damages caused by terrorist attacks overseas. Though it has not been
    used before in such a situation, I believe that this cause of action
    can reach the Palestinian Authority and its officials, who aided and
    abetted and continue to aid and abet David's killer by protecting him
    from transfer to Israel or extradition to the United States. I believe
    that this civil remedy may also be used against the individuals or
    organizations in this country responsible for providing material
    support to the HAMAS terrorists who killed David. For these actions to
    be successful, however, we need the cooperation of federal law
    enforcement authorities, particularly the information concerning
    terrorist organizations in this country which only they can provide.
    The United States should support the Boims' efforts to recover
    statutory damages against organizations that raise funds which are used
    to kill American citizens abroad.
            prosecution of the murderer hinawi in the united states
        United States law specifically provides for the prosecution of
    terrorists who kill American citizens outside the United States. The
    Antiterrorism Act of 1986, as amended in succeeding years, provides,
    ``whoever kills a national of the United States while such national is
    outside the United States,'' if the killing is murder and is ``intended
    to intimidate or coerce a civilian population or to influence policy of
    a government by intimidation or coercion,'' shall ``be fined under this
    title, punished by death or imprisonment for any term of years or for
    life.'' This provision now appears at sections 2331 and 2332 of Title
    18 of the United States Code.
        Thus, United States law makes it a criminal offense to kill a
    national of the United States in a terrorist act anywhere in the world.
    In passing these provisions, Congress specifically intended to extend
    the criminal jurisdiction of the United States to those who commit acts
    of terror against groups that include United States citizens abroad.
    Congress charged the Attorney General with the responsibility for
    investigating, pursuing, and prosecuting any individual who kills,
    attempts to kill, or engages in a conspiracy to kill an American
    national in a foreign country pursuant to a terrorist conspiracy.
        Despite Congress' specific mandate, the Justice Department has
    shown no willingness to pursue David's killers. In a letter to Joyce
    Boim dated November 3, 1997, James S. Reynolds, Chief of the
    Department's Terrorism and Violent Crime Division, stated that the
    Justice Department did not have ``sufficient evidence on which to base
    an indictment'' of Hinawi, and thus was not prepared to make an
    extradition request. The Justice Department's position was repeated in
    a letter dated February 20, 1998, front Acting Deputy Attorney General
    Frances Fragos Townsend. In a third letter dated March 31, 1998, the
    Acting Assistant Attomey General, John C. Keeney, wrote again that the
    Justice Department did not have ``sufficient admissible evidence'' on
    which to base an indictment of Hinawi. This followed Hinawi's
    conviction in the court of the Palestinian Authority and the
    publication of his confession to complicity in the murder.
        These statements by the Justice Department ignore known facts. The
    Israeli Ministry of Justice has determined definitively that Hinawi
    participated in the terrorist attack on David Boim This was based in
    part on a confession of his role in the killing which was introduced at
    the trial before a court of the Palestinian Authority which found him
    guilty. A representative of the U.S. Consulate who speaks Arabic,
    Abdelnor Zaibeck, was present at the trial and heard the confession
    read at that time. There are countless cases in which federal
    prosecutors have returned indictments based on a confession of the
    accused. Why is Hinawi's case different?
        Hinawi is not the only terrorist responsible for the killing of
    American citizens who has gone unpunished. Since the signing of the
    Oslo Accords, nine Americans have been killed in terrorist attacks, and
    none of the terrorists responsible faces a trial in the United States,
    as Congress contemplated in enacting the Antiterrorism Act of 1986 and
    amending it thereafter. The Palestinian Authority has shown a singular
    unwillingness to abide by the Oslo and Hebron Accords, which require
    that the Palestinian Authority honor Israel's requests for the transfer
    of these killers. Nor has the United States indicted these killers, as
    it should do. The Justice Department's refusal appears to be a policy
    decision not to enforce the law. This policy not only permits murderers
    of Americans to go free, but emboldens terrorists throughout the world
    and puts all Americans in danger.
        The Justice Department should pursue the murderers of United States
    citizens killed in terrorist attacks abroad with as much vigor as it
    does the murderers of United States citizens killed in this country. A
    great uproar has accompanied the recent refusal of the Israeli Supreme
    Court to extradite Samuel Sheinbein, accused of murder in Montgomery
    county, to the United States. Sheinbein was found by the Israeli
    Supreme Court to be an Israeli citizen at the time he allegedly
    committed murder. Why is there no equivalent uproar over the failure to
    bring to justice in the United States the murderer of David Boim, an
    American citizen who was killed in cold blood in Israel? As the
    Nation's chief law enforcement agency, the Justice Department has an
    obligation to press for the indictment and extradition of all murderers
    who have taken American lives--whether here or abroad--and to prosecute
    them to the fullest extent that United States law allows.
                                civil liability
        The Boims want to see David's killer tried and convicted in a
    United States court for the murder of their son, as the law provides.
    They will also pursue a civil lawsuit against those who are responsible
    for David's murder. In addition to criminal penalties, the
    Antiterrorism Act was amended in 1992 to provide for civil liability
    against those responsible for terrorist attacks against American
    citizens anywhere in the world. 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2333 states:

              Any national of the United States injured in his or her
            person, property, or business by reason of an act of
            international terrorism, or his or her estate, survivors or
            heirs, may sue therefore in any appropriate district court of
            the United States and shall recover threefold the damages he or
            she sustains.

        This civil remedy provision ensures that American citizens are able
    to bring actions for damages if injured in terrorist attacks. Congress
    added this provision following the hijacking of the Achille Lauro
    cruise ship and the murder of one of its passengers, Leon Klinghoffer,
    by PLO terrorists in 1985. Klinghoffer's survivors eventually succeeded
    in bringing a lawsuit against the PLO in New York, but they encountered
    significant legal difficulties in establishing jurisdiction over the
    responsible parties. The civil remedy provision of Sec. 2333 corrects
    that inadequacy in United States law.
        An important and unanswered question is who can be sued under this
    provision. I believe that Sec. 2333 may be applied against the
    Palestinian Authority and its officials on the theory that the
    Palestinian Authority has endorsed, encouraged, and incited acts of
    terrorism against civilians--including American citizens--who were
    present in Israel. If, as appears, the Palestinian Authority or its
    officials provided sanctuary to Hinawi after David Boim's murder, or
    permitted him to go free from a Palestinian jail, the Palestinian
    Authority is liable for the murder as an aider and abettor or accessory
    after the fact. If the Palestinian Authority continues to refuse to
    transfer known terrorists to Israel, it should be held accountable for
    civil damages on the basis that it is harboring known fugitives.
    Indeed, the failure to imprison one murderer of David Boim contributed
    to the Ben Yehuda mall bombing, in which one American was killed and
    many were wounded, because that murderer repeated his crime in an even
    more aggravated manner.
        The statutory language also strongly supports the argument that
    Sec. 2333 may reach those individuals or organizations in this country
    who provide aid, encouragement and funding to terrorist organizations.
    The statute incorporates by reference state and federal criminal law.
    Under 18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2339A-B, Congress has outlawed the provision
    of ``material support to terrorists'' and the provision of ``material
    support or resources to designated foreign terrorist organizations.''
    HAMAS and other Middle Eastern terror groups raise enormous sums of
    money in the United States through ostensibly ``humanitarian''
    organizations. These organizations are involved in an elaborate
    conspiracy to provide funds to support terrorist cells in Palestinian-
    controlled territories and throughout the Middle East. A recent
    forfeiture action brought by the United States Attorney for the Northen
    District of Illinois identified over $1.2 million worth of assets
    raised in the United States which were intended to be funneled through
    bank accounts in Chicago and elsewhere to HAMAS cells in the West Bank
    and Gaza.
        While it has yet to be applied in any case of which I am aware, the
    civil remedy is an important tool for fighting terrorism overseas by
    targeting the sources of support for terrorist activities. United
    States law is clear that the persons who assisted David Boim's killers
    by providing funding for their operations are as liable as the
    individual terrorists who pulled the trigger and killed David.
        It has been almost three years since David Boim's murder. Despite
    concerted efforts by the Boims and others to bring his killer to
    justice, we are no closer to a trial and conviction than on the day
    David was killed. Congress specifically passed the Antiterrorism Act,
    as amended, to deter terrorist attacks against American citizens abroad
    like the attack that killed David Boim. If the Attorney General does
    not enforce this law, having it on the statute books is worse than
    having no law at all. The refusal to apply a law that is clear on its
    face delivers a message that the objective of the law is unimportant--
    in this instance, that the life of an American living abroad is
    worthless to the United States Government.
        Joyce and Stanley Boim are not political activists. They are the
    bereaved parents of a murdered 17-year-old American. They cannot
    understand why the Attorney General of the United States refuses to
    enforce laws that were passed by Congress to protect them and their
    family. This Committee should demand that the Attorney General do her
    duty.
    STATEMENT OF VICKI EISENFELD, MOTHER OF MATTHEW
                EISENFELD, WEST HARTFORD, CT
        Senator Specter. I would like to now turn to Ms. Vicki
    Eisenfeld.
        Mr. Indyk. Could I just add one more point on this, Mr.
    Chairman?
        Senator Specter. We are not going to hear the last two
    witnesses if you do.
        Mr. Indyk. It will take me 30 seconds. I have just been
    told we have verified Hinawi's detention, not only this year in
    January but a year ago as well. So, you know, I think that it
    is important that so far as we can establish that the killer of
    David Boim is in custody, we have been able to do so.
        Mr. Lewin. Why has he not been indicted, Senator Specter,
    that is the question?
        Senator Specter. You are going to have a meeting, Mr.
    Lewin, with Mr. Richard.
        Mr. Lewin. Fine.
        Senator Specter. Ms. Vicki Eisenfeld's son Matthew, age 25,
    was killed in a bus bombing in Jerusalem on February 25, 1996.
    He was a graduate of Yale University and a rabbinical student
    at the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York City.
        Ms. Eisenfeld. Mr. Chairman, I thank you and the members of
    this committee for inviting me to testify today about my
    family's personal experience with terrorism. Testifying in
    front of a Senate Subcommittee on Foreign Operations is not
    something I would have chosen to have on my list of things to
    do 3 years and 1 month ago today.
        The events of February 25, 1996, changed my life forever.
    It began with a telephone ringing. Let me take you there for a
    few moments, and then maybe we can see where we need to go
    forward together. The phone is ringing. It is 4:30 in the
    morning. Not unusual in my house. My husband is a doctor. I
    hardly hear the phone at night anymore. But Len is not on call
    this night. He answers.
        In a brief moment he sounds very strange. His tone invades
    my sleep. I turn on the lights. He looks awful. He is asking
    someone, Will you tell my wife? What? Tell me what? What is
    going on? The phone is dropped into my hand. A woman tells me
    she is Catherine O'Reilly, calling from the American Embassy in
    Israel. She is telling me about a bus bombing that happened a
    few hours ago in Jerusalem.
        My mind races. As fast as I wonder why she is calling me,
    my heart is reaching for Matthew, for my son, and the sleep
    falls away completely. I think he must be hurt. I wonder what
    hospital he is in, and how fast can I get there. But this is
    not the message Ms. O'Reilly delivers. She keeps talking, and I
    keep talking.
        I do not know where my voice is coming from now. I hear
    myself, but I seem to be somewhere outside of myself. My voice
    sounds calm and familiar, but the words I am saying cannot make
    sense. I am asking her what I am supposed to do. She asks where
    I want to bury Matt. I say I do not know. I never thought of
    that before. In Israel? At home? OK, at home. No, Matt hadn't
    chosen to live in Israel. He just meant to be studying there
    for a year.
        How do I bring him home? Shall I just hop on a plane and
    come get him? Excuse me, Catherine, can I have your phone
    number? Can I call you back? Can I verify that I am not having
    a nightmare, a bad dream, or that I am the victim of a sick
    joke? I need to verify that this is the worst possible
    nightmare of reality. Are you real, Catherine? And so simply it
    began.
        Three years have passed now, and with the great love of
    family and friends, my husband's heart, our daughter's heart,
    and my heart have begun to heal. We were blessed with the gift
    of Matthew and the example of his life. We were blessed with
    knowing he was loved and in love with a wonderful young woman,
    Sara Duker. Sara died on bus 18 that day also, along with 23
    others.
        Matt and Sara exemplified the kinds of kids we all hope to
    raise. They were bright, vibrant, interested, exciting young
    people. Matt was studying to be a rabbi. He had a love of
    people that drew him to want to be involved in personal lives
    and community in a loving, caring way. He had a thirst for
    learning that encouraged him to reach for understanding from
    many sources and cultures, and there was Sara. Sara was
    studying on a graduate level and working at Hebrew University
    in the field of environmental microbiology.
        Separately and together their dreams were to participate
    actively and consciously in healing the wounds of the world
    physically and spiritually. Neither of these two young people
    was naive about the chaos and pain that exist in the world.
    Neither one was afraid to confront its repair.
        There are forces that create havoc, chaos, and evil in this
    world, and they are very strong. Murderous, terrorist attacks
    strike at the soul and core of humanity and can erase the
    sanity that rests there. Those of us with voices must raise
    them strong, loud, clear, and in unison and say that the loss
    of a single life to terrorism is not simply another death. It
    is a strike against hope, against faith, against God, against
    the shared belief that each of us is a God-given gift to the
    world, born precious, and deserving of love and respect.
        Each of us contains the ability to contribute to the world
    uniquely. I know this is the legacy that Matt and Sara left all
    of us. They are the values we believe in and the ones we raised
    our children to hold dear.
        Terrorism threatens the United States and its citizens at
    home and abroad. A strong and consistent policy to bring to
    justice terrorists and their sponsors is the most effective way
    to deter those who seek to harm Americans. My son and Sara
    Duker were the victims of terrorism when they were killed in
    Jerusalem on February 25, 1996. Many of those who were involved
    in the planning and organization of terrorist attacks such as
    the one that killed Matt and Sara are still at large.
        I stated that my family has been healing. Yet there is no
    closure. Information exists that claims people involved in
    terrorist acts against Israel and against American citizens can
    be found within Yasir Arafat's organization. Some are said to
    be on his special police force.
        We are responsible for defining the laws the United States
    will uphold, and we are responsible to see that everyone abides
    by the rule of law. And so I wonder. Why aren't we asking for
    the extradition of identified murderers?
        I am not a lawyer or a diplomat or a politician. I am just
    a mother. As a mother, it seems to me that when an engineer of
    terrorism has his foot on the ladder of Arafat's special
    forces, it is not a long way to the top of the ladder. Acts of
    terrorism are excruciating for the families who suffer these
    losses and limit the freedom of all Americans. Terrorists try
    to force us to their will by threatening all Americans with
    what happened to Matt and Sara.
        Senator Specter. Could you summarize the balance? I know
    this is very difficult for you. We are just about out of time.
        Ms. Eisenfeld. I would just like to say that while I am
    Jewish and I support and love Israel, I am an American. I was
    born here and raised here, as was my son, and I would just like
    to ask you to help all of the people here in addressing these
    issues, focusing on and encouraging the Palestinian Authority,
    particularly since the Wye River agreements, to help us.
        I understand that they very recently released information
    about the Palestinians and the Islamic Republic of Iran funding
    HAMAS terrorism. Matt and Sara were killed by HAMAS. I would
    like them to share the information and evidence they have with
    us and support us in this fight. I would like them to join with
    us.

                               prepared statement

        Senator Specter. Mrs. Eisenfeld, we will do our very best
    to get to the bottom of it and bring the murderers to justice.
    We understand what you have gone through, and we thank you for
    sharing with us today.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of Vicki Eisenfeld
        Mr. Chairman: I thank you and the members of this committee for
    inviting me to testify today about my family's personal experience with
    terrorism.
        Testifying in front of a senate subcommittee on foreign operations
    is not something I would have chosen to have on my ``list of things to
    do'' three years and one month ago today. The events of February 25,
    1996 changed my life forever. It began with a telephone ringing. Let me
    take you there for a few moments, and then maybe we can see where we
    need to go forward together.
        The phone is ringing. It's 4:30 in the morning. Not unusual in my
    house--my husband is a doctor. I hardly hear the phone at night
    anymore. But Len is not ``on call'' this night. He answers, and in
    brief moments his voice sounds strange. His tone invades my sleep. I
    turn on the lights. His face looks awful. He's asking someone, ``will
    you tell my wife?''
        ``What? Tell me what? What's going on?''
        The phone is dropped into my hand. A woman tells me she is
    Catherine O'Reilly, calling from the American Embassy in Israel. She's
    telling me about a bus bombing that happened a few hours ago in
    Jerusalem. My mind speeds up. As fast as I wonder why she is calling
    me, my heart is reaching for Matthew, for my son, and the sleep falls
    away completely. I think he must be hurt. I wonder what hospital he is
    in and how fast I can get there. But this is not the message Ms.
    O'Reilly delivers. She keeps talking, and I keep talking. I don't know
    where my voice is coming from now. I hear myself, but I seem to be
    somewhere outside of myself. My voice sounds calm and familiar, but the
    words I'm saying can't possibly make sense. I'm asking her what I'm
    supposed to do? She asks where I will want to bury Matt. I say I don't
    know. I never thought of that before. ``In Israel? At home? OK, at
    home. No Matt hadn't chosen to live in Israel, he just meant to be
    studying there for a year. How do I bring him home? Shall I just hop on
    a plane and come pick him up?''
        ``Excuse me Catherine, can I have your phone number? Can I call you
    back? Can I verify that I'm not having a nightmare, a bad dream or the
    victim of a sick joke. I need to verify that this is the worst possible
    nightmare of reality. Are you real Catherine?''
        And so simply it began.
        Three years have passed now, and with the great love of family and
    friends, my heart, my husband's heart, and our daughter's heart, have
    begun to heal. We were blessed with the gift of Matthew and the example
    of his life. We were blessed with knowing he was loved and in love with
    a wonderful young woman, Sara Duker. Sara died on Bus 18 that day also,
    along with 23 others. Matt and Sara exemplified the kinds of kids we
    all hope to raise. They were bright, vibrant, interested, exciting
    people. Matt was studying to be a Rabbi. He had a love of people that
    drew him to want to be involved in personal lives and community in a
    loving, caring way. He had a thirst for learning that encouraged him to
    reach for understanding from many sources and cultures. And there was
    Sara. Sara was studying on a graduate level and working at Hebrew
    University in the field of environmental microbiology. Separately, and
    together, their dreams were to participate actively and consciously in
    healing the wounds of the world physically and spiritually. Neither of
    these two young people was naive about the chaos and pain that exist in
    the world. Neither one was afraid to confront its' repair.
        There are forces that create havoc, chaos, and evil in this world,
    and they are very strong. Murderous, terrorist attacks, strike at the
    soul and core of humanity, and can erase the sanity that rests there.
    Those of us with voices must raise them strong, loud, clear and in
    unison, to say that the loss of a single life to terrorism is not
    simply another death. It is a strike against hope, against faith,
    against G-d, against the shared belief that each of us is a G-d given
    gift to the world, born precious and deserving of love and respect.
    Each of us contains the ability to contribute uniquely to our world. I
    know that this is the legacy that Matt and Sara left all of us. They
    are the values we believe in and the ones we raised our children to
    hold dear.
        Terrorism threatens the United States and its citizens at home and
    abroad. A strong and consistent policy to bring to justice terrorists
    and their sponsors is the most effective way to deter those who seek to
    harm Americans. My son and Sara Duker were the victims of terrorism
    when they were killed in Jerusalem on February 25, 1996. Many of those
    who were involved in the planning and organization of terrorist acts
    such are the one that killed Matt and Sara are still at large.
        I have stated that my family has been healing. Yet there is no
    closure. Information exists that claims people involved in terrorist
    acts against Israel and against American citizens can be found within
    Yasir Arafat's organization. Some are said to be on his special police
    force. We are responsible for defining the laws the United States will
    uphold, and we are responsible to see that everyone abides by the rule
    of law. And so I wonder. Why aren't we asking for the extradition of
    identified murderers? I am not a lawyer. I'm just a mother. As a mother
    it seems to me that when an engineer of terrorism has his foot on the
    ladder of Arafat's Special forces--it isn't a long way to the top of
    the ladder. Acts of terrorism are excruciating for the families who
    suffer these losses, and limit the freedom of all Americans. Terrorists
    try to force us to their will by threatening all Americans with that
    happened to Matt and Sara. It can't be permitted to keep happening.
    Until the United States acts to bring those involved in terrorism to
    justice, no American will truly be safe, at home or abroad.
        The United States should not, in the name of political expediency,
    excuse or protect those who commit or sponsor terrorist acts. We must
    live up to our political pronouncements--everyday and in every
    circumstance. A government that claims to be friendly but permits or
    sponsors terrorism is no friend of the United States. We must use our
    considerable influence, with our friends and against our enemies, to
    fight terrorism and bring to justice those who use terrorism.
        I am Jewish, and I do love and support the land of Israel. But, I
    am an American. I was born here. I was raised here, and I have always
    lived here. So had my son. I would venture to guess that many senators'
    sons and daughters have studied or traveled abroad. All of us, I assume
    believe that our nation should be responsible to our needs. I know that
    my son's murder is complicated, and presents difficult problems in
    territorial issues and in diplomacy. I know that the peace process is
    critical and is always delicately balanced and precarious. There will
    never be peaceful coexistence when mothers and fathers see their
    children slaughtered without hope that the slayers will be brought to
    justice. When a son or daughter's murder is ignored, the shards it
    casts burrow insidiously deep into our collective conscience to fester
    and erupt again in worse ways and compound disappointment and loss.
        Matt and Sara were at the very beginning of a trip on the day they
    were killed. They were on a short break from school and work, and they
    both wanted to explore the caves of Petra in Jordan. They were unafraid
    of what lay ahead, only wanting to expand their knowledge and horizons
    of humanity's history. While they were going in peace, the evil that
    humans are capable of creating was coming to them with terror and
    absolute hopelessness in the form of a bomb.
        After Matt's death, some of the possessions he carried with him on
    the bus that day were returned to us. These were his prayer shawl, some
    notebooks, and his prayer book. They were preserved, though they were
    filled with soot and reeked of gasoline. His prayer book was undamaged
    except for one page--and there--on the prayer for peace--was a single
    drop of blood.
        Blood has been spilled too many times since. It must be stopped. I
    am sure that the members of this committee are aware that my family and
    the Duker family have brought a suit against the Islamic Republic of
    Iran for its' support of HAMAS terrorism. Matthew and Sara were killed
    by a HAMAS bombing. With this in mind, I note that this committee has
    invited a representative of the Palestinian Authority to testify today.
    Recently, the PA issued press releases condemning Iranian funding of
    HAMAS terrorist activities. I intend to ask the PA to share its'
    evidence of their findings with us on Iranian sponsorship of HAMAS
    activities in preparation for our trial. I know that in Mr. Steven
    Flatow's case on behalf of his daughter Alisa, the PA was unwilling to
    be helpful. In light of the Wye River agreements, I am hopeful that the
    PA has matured in its' position on these issues and will be more
    forthcoming. I ask this committee to urge the PA to fully cooperate
    with my family as we try our case against Iranian state sponsored
    terrorism. My family and the Duker family are doing all we can to
    address terrorism. I don't seek quick easy answers. I can be patient if
    you will help me. Please help all of us.
    STATEMENT OF DIANA CAMPUZANO, SURVIVOR OF ISRAELI
                BOMBING, NEW YORK, NEW YORK
        Senator Specter. I would like to turn now to Ms. Diana
    Campuzano who on September 4, 1997, while visiting Israel was
    in a cafe in downtown Jerusalem when three terrorists' bombs
    went off, killing 5 and injuring nearly 200 people, including
    Ms. Campuzano. Thank you for being here.
        Ms. Campuzano. Thank you. I am basically here just to tell
    my side of the story because most people always--most people do
    not get a chance to hear a story from a victim. About a year
    and a half ago I went to Israel for a month vacation, and that
    was it. I was there to study in a yeshiva and just have fun. I
    went to Ben Yehuda to buy a gift for a girl who was cat sitting
    in my apartment in New York City, and I sat down in front of
    the Village Green Cafe.
        Why would it be any different? I was there like the entire
    trip almost every single day prior to that. We actually did see
    one of the suicide bombers who walked by us, and he was dressed
    in drag, and the girl in front of me had mentioned that there
    was a girl dressed in drag, and I looked and I said, OK, and I
    turned around and I chose to ignore it.
        At 3:09 approximately the bomb went off, and I remember
    falling to the ground and grabbing my forehead, and I said some
    things I really cannot say right now, and I couldn't see
    anything. I did not hear anything because I was in complete
    shock. I ended up in Hadassah. There were eight of us that were
    critically injured, and I was the second most critically
    injured person.
        I had a 7-hour surgery to reconstruct my forehead. I had a
    multiple skull fracture the size of a golf ball. Half of my
    forehead is fake. I have about six screws in my forehead right
    now. My nose was completely pushed inside my nose cavity. I did
    not have a nose at the time. Also other injuries that I have
    sustained are second degree burns on my arms and my legs and my
    eyes hemorrhaged, and as a result my right eye--as a result, in
    my right eye I now have a scar right on the retina, so my
    vision is now impaired.
        Both of my sinuses on the top of my forehead are completely
    gone. I no longer taste and I no longer smell. The loss in my
    left ear, the eardrum exploded. When I came back to the United
    States--I was in Hadassah for about 5\1/2\ weeks, of which
    Netanyahu never came to visit the critically injured people.
        When I came to the United States, I stayed to live with my
    parents, and it was probably the hardest year of my life, and
    it is still very hard. My nose was left crooked in Israel. The
    vision, I had no vision in my eye. Eventually it did come back.
        Since I have been in the United States I have had three
    surgeries. I have had to undergo surgery in my eye to remove a
    cataract and other various things. I had to have my nose broken
    and reset, and not only that, I have scar tissue in my nasal
    passages removed because I couldn't breathe, and my last
    surgery was on my ear to have my eardrum rebuilt.
        I have another surgery coming up at the end of May to have
    my forehead reconstructed, my eyebrow--my orbit reconstructed,
    have an eyelid tuck, and have the screws taken out of my
    forehead.
        The bottom line here is that, you know--and I do not mean
    any disrespect to anybody, but--and you should never forget the
    people who have died in these crises because it is a horrific
    thing, but people always forget about us who survive. They
    think, oh, she's alive; she's OK.
        Well, I am not OK. I have had my life turned upside down. I
    have had my self worth taken away. I have--my security has been
    taken away. I am not working at the moment, so my financial
    situation has also been disrupted.
        It is--somebody told me once, he said, Diana, you died on
    that day, and you were born again on that day. It is almost as
    if I am learning to walk all over again. And I get bouts of
    depression, I throw temper tantrums, and I am--who I was
    before, I am not that person, and I have to totally relive and
    relearn who I am.
        You know, Americans think, oh, it will never happen to us,
    it will never happen to us because we are on this side of the
    water. No. It can happen to anybody. Why would I think that
    this would happen to me? Why? It would not. I mean, people go
    to Israel, they come back, and usually they come back in one
    piece. I happened to be eating in a cafe in Ben Yehuda where
    everybody else goes, why would it be any different? But it
    wasn't.
        My parents, yes, they can talk to me, I am alive, but part
    of me is dead, and my parents have it just as hard because they
    see me going through this difficult time, and we have had to
    deal with Israel as well, and that is--I do not even want to go
    into details with that, that is difficult as it is.
        When my father found out, he got a phone call when this
    whole thing happened, got a collect phone call, and also a call
    from Israel, and when he found out he--he had no idea there was
    a bombing in Israel, and he turned on CNN, and when he turned
    on CNN when they did the headline news, there was a picture of
    a girl in a dress being carried on a stretcher, and that was
    me.
        My mother found out, she was on vacation with my brother.
    My father called my mother. He located her. My mother was
    looking at the USA Today, and what picture did she see? Me.
    That was me in that picture. I actually have the pictures with
    me. But that was me.
        When my father came to visit me in Israel--Israel brought
    them over from the United States--my father walked right past
    me because he had no idea who I was because I had a bandage
    over my head, I had--I was full of blood, of blood on my face,
    and I also had--I was swollen, and I was on a respirator. They
    did not know if I was going to be dumb or retarded or be blind.
        But I am not here--I am not a politician, I cannot make
    argument regarding politics. I am just here to tell you my side
    of the story and to make you realize that there are people who
    are alive and who are suffering.
        Senator Specter. Ms. Campuzano, you have told a very, very
    compelling story. We thank you very much for coming in.
        Ms. Campuzano. Thank you.
    STATEMENT OF HASAN ABDEL RAHMAN, CHIEF REPRESENTATIVE
                OF THE PALESTINIAN LIBERATION ORGANIZATION
                AND THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL AUTHORITY TO
                THE UNITED STATES
        Senator Specter. We will proceed with all of these matters
    to the final degree to find out what is happening on all these
    cases. We will be reviewing them in detail with Mr. Richard and
    the Department of Justice, and Mr. Indyk, and we will press as
    hard as we can to see that the perpetrators are brought to
    justice.
        I would like now to call our final panel. We will see how
    far we can get. Mr. Niddam and Mr. Hasan Abdel Rahman. It is a
    sticky situation. Mr. Richard, would you please give way to the
    next panel. The situation on the Senate floor is that the vote
    has started on the amendment which is actually mine on the
    National Institutes of Health, and as I say, we have two more
    back-to-back-to-back.
        But let us start with Mr. Hasan Abdel Rahman, and note the
    compliment which Prime Minister Netanyahu paid to Palestinian
    Authority and the note in The Washington Post today about the
    foiled bombing which had targeted Tel Aviv. I extend our thanks
    to the Palestinian authorities as well. You may proceed.
        Mr. Rahman. Mr. Chairman, I greatly appreciate the
    opportunity to appear before this distinguished committee of
    the U.S. Senate. The Palestinian people admire the American
    democracy and its fine institutions and hope to learn from
    them.
        Senator Specter. Can I interrupt you, sir. Are you in a
    position to stay for a while if I go vote and come back? What
    is your timetable?
        Mr. Rahman. I can stay here until a little bit before 1
    o'clock.
        Senator Specter. You better proceed because I will not be
    back by then on the vote.
        Mr. Rahman. The Palestinian people admire the American
    democracy and its fine institutions and hope to learn from them
    as we build our own political and economic systems. Both the
    Palestinian Authority and its public are very grateful for the
    leading role of the United States in the march for a just and
    comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
        Allow me, Mr. Chairman, in these opening remarks to make a
    few important points about our policy toward peace in the
    Middle East and about our bilateral relations with the United
    States.
        First, our decisions to seek a peaceful settlement with
    Israel and to reject violence as a means to political ends are
    final and irreversible. The Oslo Accords created an opportunity
    for mutual acceptance and coexistence that we intend to exploit
    until a full and permanent peace prevails between us.
        Israelis and Palestinians are fated to be neighbors
    forever, and we must both prepare our children for a life of
    peace, acceptance, and mutual respect. We will not go back on
    this decision.
        Second, our fight with terrorism is strategic and unending.
    We do not fight terrorism merely because it threatens other
    states, including Israel, but because terrorism threatens our
    own society and the kind of democratic institutions we intend
    to build. Our fight with terrorism is not contingent. It is an
    unending commitment, Mr. Chairman. On this issue our interests
    with the United States, Israel, and Arab neighbors are
    identical.
        Third, the days when we viewed Israel as our enemy are
    over. The peace process has opened up common interests that are
    bigger than the differences. Today there is a new division,
    Palestinians and Israelis united for peace challenging
    Palestinian and Israelis who oppose peace. To be sure, we have
    some serious differences with Israel, and many important issues
    of contention in our arduous negotiations, but our aim is to
    resolve these issues through peaceful negotiations, knowing
    very well that majorities of Israelis and Palestinians will
    remain solidly behind peace even in the midst of crises.
        Fourth, we consider our growing bilateral relations with
    the United States as a cornerstone of our peace policy. The
    United States has been an indispensable leader in every
    successful peace effort between Israel and its neighbors, and
    has been crucial in implementing the Oslo agreements and
    securing the Wye River agreement.
        The growing coordination and cooperation between us have
    led to an increasing level of mutual trust that has enabled the
    Palestinian Authority to take risks for peace even in the face
    of public skepticism. The stronger this relationship, the
    higher the prospects for peace.
        Fifth, our bilateral relations with the United States are
    important for our efforts to build the kind of political,
    educational, economic, and legal systems that our people desire
    and deserve. The Palestinian people admire the American
    democracy and the economy of free trade. Certainly we have
    traditions and social institutions that we value and must take
    into account in constructing our system, but we have much to
    learn from the United States.
        The educational, economic, and legal cooperation efforts--
    --

                               prepared statement

        Senator Specter. Mr. Abdel Rahman, I hate to interrupt you.
    Your full statement will be made a part of the record. We will
    be in touch with you further.
        [The statement follows:]
                    Prepared Statement of Hasan Abdel Rahman
        Mr. Chairman, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to appear before
    this distinguished committee of the United States Senate. The
    Palestinian people admire the American democracy and its fine
    institutions and hope to learn from them as we build our own political
    and economic systems. Both the Palestinian Authority and its public are
    very grateful for the leading role of the United States in the march
    for a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
        Allow me, Mr. Chairman, in these opening remarks to make a few
    important points about our policy toward peace in the Middle East and
    about our bilateral relations with the United States.
        First, our decisions to seek a peaceful settlement with Israel and
    to reject violence as a means to political ends are final and
    irreversible. The Oslo Accords created an opportunity for mutual
    acceptance and coexistence that we intend to exploit until a full and
    permanent peace prevails between us. Israelis and Palestinians are
    fated to be neighbors forever, and we must both prepare our children
    for a life of peace, acceptance and mutual respect. We will not go back
    on this decision.
        Second, our fight with terrorism is strategic and unending. We do
    not fight terrorism merely because it threatens other states, including
    Israel, but because terrorism threatens our own society and the kind of
    democratic institutions we intend to build. Our fight with terrorism is
    not contingent; it is an unending commitment. On this issue our
    interests and those of our neighbors are identical.
        Third, the peace process has opened up common interests that are
    bigger than the differences. Today, there is a new division:
    Palestinians and Israelis united for peace challenging Palestinian and
    Israeli opponents of peace. To be sure, we have some serious
    differences with Israel and many important issues of contention in our
    arduous negotiations. But our aim is to resolve these issues through
    peaceful negotiations, knowing very well that majorities of Israelis
    and Palestinians remain solidly behind peace, even in the midst of
    crises.
        Fourth, we consider our growing bilateral relations with the United
    States as a cornerstone of our peace policy. The United States has been
    an indispensable leader in every successful peace effort between Israel
    and its neighbors, and has been crucial in implementing the Oslo
    agreements and securing the Wye River Memorandum. The growing
    coordination and cooperation between us have led to an increasing level
    of mutual trust that has enabled the Palestinian Authority to take
    risks for peace even in the face of public skepticism. The stronger
    this relationship, the higher the prospects of peace.
        Fifth, our bilateral relations with the United States are important
    for our efforts to build the kind of political, educational, economic
    and legal systems that our people desire and deserve. The Palestinian
    people admire the American democracy and the economy of free trade.
    Certainly, we have traditions and social institutions that we value and
    must take into account in constructing our system, but we have much to
    learn from the United States. The educational, economic and legal
    cooperation efforts increase the levels of expertise among our people
    and open our horizons to new, more successful ways. The stronger these
    efforts of cooperation, the better our chance at building modern
    accountable institutions. The stronger our democracy and our system of
    free trade, the better for the cause of a lasting peace.
        Sixth, we do not view our relations with the U.S. as being
    competitive with anyone else. On the contrary, we view them as
    reinforcing U.S. relations with other partners in the peace process,
    since our interests in peace are mutual. In the same way that both
    U.S.-Egyptian relations and U.S.-Israeli relations were enhanced by
    their own peace, we believe that Palestinian-U.S.-Israeli relations
    would be similarly enhanced.
        Mr. Chairman, I am not here to score points or to point fingers
    about the current difficulties in the peace process. The Palestinian
    Authority is guided by the principles that I have outlined in its
    determination to see the Oslo Accords and the Wye River agreements
    implemented, and we believe we have complied with the terms of these
    agreements under very difficult circumstances.
        I would be less than candid if I state to you today that we have so
    far been fully successful every step of the way in meeting the
    aspirations of our people and in implementing our agenda. Some of our
    failures have been honest mistakes of a people building new
    institutions under difficult circumstances. Some have to do with the
    absence of special skills and resources. But we ask our friends in
    Congress not to underestimate our external and internal dilemmas. Yes,
    we have neither a full democracy nor a fully modern free market economy
    yet. We recognize the shortcomings of our media and educational
    materials, among others. But consider this: We have no full control
    over our lives. Five years after our peace agreements with Israel, our
    impoverished people are still clustered in small and non-contiguous
    patches of land, separated by Israeli soldiers, and our access to the
    outside world remains out of our hands. No free economy can flourish in
    this environment.
        We find ourselves at this delicate stage of the peace process
    having to address public skepticism, in the absence of a visible
    economic dividend, while having to fight our big enemy, terrorism. The
    resources and energies that are necessary for this effort have
    undermined our ability to spend on other important projects. Because
    the fight with terrorism is often harsh, our people fear that democracy
    is undermined. It is in this spirit that we recognize that ultimate
    progress in such arenas as the media and education must take place not
    through centralized decrees and police actions, but by engaging the
    specialists and the public and beginning a constructive dialogue.
    Because of the tough action we take on terrorism, we must especially be
    careful in other arenas--lest we lose not only the confidence of our
    public, but also the opportunity to build the democracy we need.
        Mr. Chairman, we do not expect our friends in Congress to refrain
    from constructive criticism where appropriate; we must improve. We do
    not ask Congress to choose between us and other friends of the United
    States, since our interests are mutual. We do ask for fairness, for
    recognition of the pain of our people, and of the progress that we have
    made under strenuous circumstances. We have witnessed much criticism
    from this great institution of the American people, but little
    encouragement or acknowledgement of our efforts. To this date, even as
    we have become partners in peace, Congressional legislation treats us
    as terrorists.
        The aspirations of the Palestinian people are modest: an
    opportunity to determine their own future on their own land. We dream
    of our children having normal peaceful lives competing with their
    neighbors not over guns, but over computer skills and productivity. We
    believe that the United Sates is indispensable in securing this dream.
    We hope that the U.S. Senate will be a fair and constructive partner in
    our peaceful march.
        Thank you.
    STATEMENT OF JEAN-CLAUDE NIDDAM, DIRECTOR, LEGAL
                ASSISTANCE DIVISION, ISRAELI MINISTRY OF
                JUSTICE
        Senator Specter. Mr. Niddam.
        Mr. Niddam. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for providing me the
    opportunity to testify before the committee today. My name is
    Jean-Claude Niddam. I am the director of the Legal Assistance
    Division at the Israeli Ministry of Justice. This division
    deals with matters of legal assistance between Israel and the
    Palestinian Authority.
        Some of the most important cases the division handles
    concern Palestinians suspected of terrorist activity. Israel
    has provided United States authorities with information in
    relevant cases.
        Since the beginning of the Oslo process in 1993, 285
    Israeli and foreign innocent bystanders have been killed in
    terrorist attacks. During this period 1,417 have been injured.
    At least 12 American citizens were among those killed in
    terrorist attacks.
        Terrorists suspected of killing these American citizens
    have found shelter in the Palestinian Authority. To date,
    Israel has officially submitted to the Palestinian Authority 38
    requests for the arrest and transfer of suspected terrorists.
        To summarize, because I know that the committee is short of
    time, from the 38 requests submitted to the Palestinian
    Authority, 18 of the suspects are not under arrest, and this
    information is updated. One is under arrest but is free to come
    and go as he wishes. Seven are on an unknown status. Maybe we
    know what is their exact status. There are 12 under arrest.
        Suspects directly responsible for the death of American
    citizens are among these terrorists. I will focused on eight
    terrorists who were involved in killing American citizens. The
    Palestinian Authority has detained three of these terrorists.
    There are Nabil Shari'hi. Nabil Shari'hi, currently in
    detention, was involved in an attack that killed Alisa Flatow
    from New Jersey.
        Abdel Magid Dudin, sentenced to 12 years in jail, was
    involved in an attack that killed Joan Davenny of Connecticut.
    Amjad Hinawi confessed in a Palestinian court to killing David
    Boim, an American student. The confession was witnessed by a
    U.S. Consulate general officer, Mr. Abdel Nour Zaibeck. Mr.
    Hinawi was sentenced to 10 years in prison. I would submit for
    the record a copy of the judgment of the report of Mr. Zaibeck.
        Another suspect, Ibrahim Ghanimat, was tied to a terror
    cell responsible for an attack on a young couple, Yaron Unger
    and his wife Efrat, an American citizen. Both were killed
    following a shooting attack on their car. Their infant child in
    the car at the time survived the attack. As far as we know, Mr.
    Ghanimat spends his nights in prison, but he is free to come
    and go during the day.
        Three additional Palestinian terrorists who killed
    Americans are free. They are Adnan Al-Ghul, Yusuf Samiri, and
    Mohammed Def. They were involved in the deaths of Alisa Flatow,
    among other incidents.
        The eighth terrorist, Nafez Sabi'h, was involved in a
    bombing that killed three Americans. He was serving in the
    Palestinian police force until last week, even though a formal
    request to arrest and transfer him was submitted to the
    Palestinian Authority 2 years ago. According to our
    information, Mr. Sabi'h may have been arrested in the last few
    days.
        It is important to present to this congressional committee
    the procedure Israel follows before submitting a request to the
    Palestinian Authority for the transfer of a suspect. Firstly,
    we hand over to the Israeli Attorney General's office, Mr.
    Rubenstein's office, evidence concerning a case. If the
    Attorney General is convinced that there is sufficient evidence
    that links the suspect to a crime which warrants his arrest and
    interrogation, the case is forwarded to an Israeli court of
    law.
        If this court is convinced of the validity of the evidence,
    our government officially requests that the Palestinian
    Authority hand over the suspect. We have submitted requests
    like these for the past 4 years. Not one has been answered.

                               prepared statement

        I would also like to point out that there is very little
    Palestinian Authority cooperation on legal matters, even in
    cases involving rape, theft, and other criminal activities
    committed by Palestinians. The same applies to civil matters.
        Senator Specter. Mr. Niddam, I must interrupt you. Your
    full statement will be made a part of the record.
        [The statement follows:]
                    Prepared Statement of Jean-Claude Niddam
        Thank you Mr. Chairman for providing me the opportunity to testify
    before the committee today.
        My name is Jean-Claude Niddam. I am the director of the Legal
    Assistance Division at the Israeli Ministry of Justice. This division
    deals with matters of legal assistance between Israel and the
    Palestinian Authority.
        Some of the most important cases the division handles concern
    Palestinians suspected of terrorist activity. Israel has provided
    United States authorities with information in relevant cases.
        Since the beginning of the Oslo process in 1993, two hundred and
    eighty-five Israeli and foreign innocent bystanders have been killed in
    terrorist attacks. Since the signing of Oslo II in 1995, one hundred
    and thirty-three Israeli and foreign innocent bystanders have been
    killed in terrorist attacks. During this period, one thousand four
    hundred and seventeen have been injured.
        Twelve American citizens (Nachshon Wachsman, Joan Davenny, Leah
    Stern, Yael Botwin, Yaron Unger, Sara Duker, Matthew Eisenfeld, Ira
    Weinstein, Alisa Flatow, David Boim, Daniel Frei and Yitzchak
    Weinstock) were among those killed in terrorist attacks.
        Terrorists suspected of killing these American citizens have found
    shelter in the Palestinian Authority. To date, Israel has officially
    submitted to the Palestinian Authority thirty-eight requests for the
    transfer of suspected terrorists. Suspects directly responsible for the
    death of American citizens are among these terrorists. I will focus on
    eight terrorists, all of whom have been implicated in killing
    Americans.
        The Palestinian Authority has detained three of these terrorists.
    They are Nabil Shari'hi, Abdel Magid Dudin and Amjad Hinawi. Nabil
    Shari'hi, currently in detention, was involved in an attack that killed
    Alisa Flatow from New Jersey. Abdel Magid Dudin, sentenced to twelve
    years in jail, was involved in an attack that killed Joan Davenny of
    Connecticut.
        Amjad Hinawi confessed in a Palestinian court to killing David
    Boim, an American student. An United States Consulate general officer,
    Mr. Abd el Nour Zaibeck, witnessed the confession. Mr. Hinawi was
    sentenced to ten years in prison.
        Another suspect, Ibrahim Ghanimat, was tied to a terror cell
    responsible for an attack on a young couple, Yaron Unger (an American
    citizen) and his wife Efrat. Both were killed following a shooting
    attack on their car. Their infant child, in the car at the time,
    survived the attack. As far as we know, Mr. Ghanimat spends his nights
    in prison, but he is free to come and go during the day.
        Three additional Palestinian terrorists who killed Americans are
    free. They are Adnan Al-Ghul, Yusuf Samiri and Mohammed Def. They were
    involved in the death of Alisa Flatow, among other incidents. The
    eighth terrorist, Nafez Sabi'h, was involved in a bombing that killed
    three Americans. He was serving in the Palestinian police force until
    last week, even though a formal request to arrest and transfer him was
    submitted to the Palestinian Authority two years ago. According to our
    information, Mr. Sabi'h may have been arrested in the last few days.
        It is important to present to this congressional committee the
    procedure Israel follows before submitting a request to the Palestinian
    Authority for the transfer of a suspect.
        Firstly, we hand over to the Israeli Attorney General's office
    evidence concerning a case. If the Attorney General is convinced that
    there is sufficient evidence that links the suspect to a crime, which
    warrants his arrest and interrogation, the case is forwarded to an
    Israeli court of law. If this court is convinced of the validity of the
    evidence, our government officially requests that the Palestinian
    Authority hand over the suspect. We have submitted requests like these
    for the past four years. Not one has been answered.
        I would also like to point out that there is very little
    Palestinian Authority cooperation on legal matters, even in cases
    involving rape, theft and other criminal activities committed by
    Palestinians. The same applies to civil matters.
        The Wye Memorandum addresses Israeli-Palestinian cooperation on
    legal matters. During the Wye talks, the Palestinian delegation
    committed to the convening of the legal committee immediately following
    these talks.
        However, Israel has not received a response from the Palestinian
    Authority despite repeated requests by our side to set a date for a
    legal committee meeting. According to Israeli-Palestinian agreements,
    the legal committee is the official forum through which requests
    concerning suspected terrorists are addressed.
        In regard to investigations involving terrorist attacks in which
    Americans have been killed: Israel shared evidence with a FBI and U.S.
    Justice Department delegation that visited Israel in March and October
    1998. Another visit is scheduled during the next two weeks. Israel has
    fully cooperated with the American team, a point acknowledged in a FBI
    letter to the Israeli Attorney General.
        The American delegation interviewed about thirty-five Israeli law
    enforcement officers. Furthermore, the delegation was provided copies
    of our investigative files, including videotapes, photographs, synopsis
    reports of crime scenes, police reports, witness statements, statements
    by accomplices of the suspects and case summary reports. The FBI
    investigation team was also given relevant court documents, such as
    copies of indictments and transcripts of court proceedings.
        Mr. Chairman, the Palestinian Authority has not responded to
    Israel's thirty-eight requests to arrest and transfer suspects. Out of
    the thirty-eight requests, only twelve suspects are currently under
    arrest, fifteen are at large and nine are of unknown status. One is
    under arrest, but is free to come and go as he pleases and seven are
    currently serving in the Palestinian police or served until recently in
    the Palestinian security service. When the authority has arrested
    suspects, these suspects have been often released shortly afterward, in
    what has come to be known as a ``revolving door'' policy. Mr. Khalil
    Sharif is an example of a suspect who was not arrested or brought to
    justice In May 1996, he participated in the killing of David Boim. A
    year later, he participated in a suicide bombing attack that killed
    five innocent bystanders, including one American. We are confident that
    the United States and Israel both hold the view that terrorists must be
    brought to justice. Israel would welcome any measures taken by the
    U.S., which will allow for the trial of these individuals. Israel
    believes that an investigation of these cases will move the peace
    process forward.
        Mr. Chairman: Thank you for providing me the opportunity to testify
    today.

        Senator Specter. I want to express my regrets that we were
    unable to really handle this matter as we would have liked to,
    but once the voting starts--and I am going to have to ask for
    an extension of time because I am going to be late as we
    arrive.
        I want to express my special apologies to Miss Campuzano
    and to Miss Eisenfeld and Mr. Flatow for not being able to give
    you more time here today and to all of the witnesses, but this
    is a matter of enormous importance, and the subcommittee will
    be pursuing it to find out why indictments have not been
    returned in cases where there is evidence, and why matters are
    not being pursued with the Palestinian Authority. Thank you all
    very much.

                              subcommittee recess

        The subcommittee will stand in recess until 10:45 a.m.,
    Thursday, April 29 when we will receive testimony from the Hon.
    Brian Atwood, Administrator, Agency for International
    Development.
        [Whereupon, at 12:16 p.m., Thursday, March 25, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10:45 a.m.,
    Thursday, April 29.]

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                  ----------

                            THURSDAY, APRIL 29, 1999

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 10:48 a.m., in room SD-124, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mitch McConnell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators McConnell, Bennett, Campbell, Stevens,
    Leahy, Lautenberg, and Mikulski.

                      AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

    STATEMENT OF HON. J. BRIAN ATWOOD, ADMINISTRATOR

                 opening statement of Senator Mitch Mc Connell

        Senator McConnell. Good morning. This hearing will come to
    order. This is a hearing we had previously had scheduled, but
    it takes on, obviously, new meaning with the events of the last
    few weeks. And we will obviously focus on the humanitarian
    crisis in Kosova and in the areas surrounding Kosova.
        We actually have no shortage of problems, as we all know.
    What we have is a shortage of funds. In this austere
    environment, AID must define and fund programs in countries
    where our national security interests are at stake.
        I want to touch on one country before coming to the current
    crisis. Indonesia is an example of such a country. Last year, I
    was very tough on Mr. Atwood on a wide variety of issues and
    actually probably tougher on what I perceived to be the
    Agency's failure in Indonesia.
        Having just returned from Jakarta, I want to give you a
    compliment, Mr. Atwood. I think you and your mission director
    have made substantial improvements in our assistance program in
    that important country. And I wanted to thank you for that and
    to congratulate you for the work you are doing there.
        Having said that, I do think clearly today ought to focus
    on the area that is most in the news and of most concern to the
    Congress and to the American people. In Kosova, I think your
    disaster response teams have worked extremely hard under
    unbearably difficult and constantly changing circumstances.
        The numbers of refugees, which your staff in both Macedonia
    and Albania are responding to, continues to rise. And as we
    know, there is essentially no letup in sight.
        They and the NGO community are doing the best they can, but
    they deserve really, I think, more effective support from here
    in Washington.
        To deal with this crisis, the administration has requested
    $566 million, which reflects the needs of roughly 600,000
    refugees over a period of 3 to 6 months.
        I think UNHCR and the administration planning is
    essentially underestimating the size and the duration and the
    cost of this human tragedy. During the early days of the
    crisis, I understood why the problems were so difficult to
    manage, but now I am and, frankly, a lot of the others are
    tired of the excuses.
        Let me just tick off some specific concerns, which I expect
    you share, Mr. Atwood.
        No. 1, the registration process has been slow for people in
    camps and non-existent--essentially, non-existent for refugees
    staying with host families.
        Families are waiting in line for 5 hours for two loaves of
    bread. Little effort seems to be underway to deal with the huge
    population of children in the camps. Counseling and education
    are both key shortfalls with the current operation.
        Basic sanitation needs are not being met. And as we know,
    the weather is going to get warmer soon, and that will
    exacerbate all of these problems.
        And there is no single agency effectively coordinating the
    response to shortages or assessing future needs.
        So, Director Atwood, there were thousands of refugees and
    internally displaced people in desperate need before the air
    war began. And there will be hundreds of thousands more long--
    and I will repeat--long after the military portion of this is
    over.
        I think the administration's plans to deal with this
    catastrophe are short-sighted and the European and U.N.
    response totally inadequate.
        I am also extremely disappointed by the Macedonian
    Government's response. They have quarantined refugees in barbed
    wire camps, limiting assistance and denying requests to expand
    the space they will make available for those camps. At the same
    time your request for aid anticipates substantial cash payments
    to this uncooperative government.
        In addition, I have been under considerable pressure to
    release a hold I had on funds to arm their security forces in
    Macedonia. These are the same forces which have been widely
    accused of collaborating with the Serbs and abusing refugees.
    Given this track record, I am very uneasy using cash payments
    to induce cooperation.
        The Serbs have created a humanitarian disaster. We are now
    faced with one of our own creation, essentially a management
    disaster.
        Today, we must come to a clear agreement on just how many
    refugees need support, how long they will need it, and how the
    international community and AID intends to provide this
    essential assistance.

                               prepared statement

        The Kosovars have suffered long enough. This supplemental
    is our one opportunity to address this suffering, and I think
    it is important that we make sure that we do it in the right
    way.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Senator Mitch McConnell
        This session was planned some time ago to review AID's annual
    request. While I have a few observations to make on the general budget
    request, I think most of us will concentrate on funding priorities and
    plans related to Kosova.
        On the broader budget request, I remain concerned that the 150
    account will not have resources adequate to meet the challenges ahead.
    There are no shortages of problems--only a shortage of funds.
        In this austere environment, the Agency must define and fund
    programs in countries where our national security interests are at
    stake. Indonesia is just such a country. Last year, I was very tough on
    you on a wide variety of issues, but toughest on the Agency's failure
    in Indonesia. Having just returned from Jakarta, I want to congratulate
    you and your Mission Director for substantial improvement in our
    assistance program.
        Turning to Kosova, I think your Disaster Response Teams have worked
    extremely hard under unbearably difficult and constantly changing
    circumstances. The numbers of refugees which your staff in both
    Macedonia and Albania are responding to continues to rise--with no let
    up in sight.
        They and the NGO community are doing the best they can, but they
    deserve more effective support from Washington. To deal with this
    crisis, the Administration has requested $566 million which reflects
    the needs of roughly 600,000 refugees for 3 to 6 months. I think UNHCR
    and Administration planning is underestimating the size, duration and
    costs of this human tragedy.
        During the early days of the crisis, I understood why the problems
    were was so difficult to manage, but, now I am tired of the excuses.
    Let me tick off some specific concerns which I am sure you share:
      --The registration process has been slow for people in camps and non-
            existent for refugees staying with host families.
      --Families are waiting in line for five hours for two loaves of
            bread.
      --Little effort seems to be underway to deal with the huge population
            of children in the camps. Counseling and education are both key
            shortfalls.
      --Basic sanitation needs are not being met.
      --And, there is no single agency effectively coordinating the
            response to shortages or assessing future needs.
        Mr. Atwood, there were thousands of refugees and internally
    displaced people in desperate need before the air war began, and there
    will be hundreds of thousands more, long after it ends. I think the
    Administration's plans to deal with this catastrophe are shortsighted
    and the European and the UN response inadequate.
        I am also extremely disappointed by the Macedonian government's
    response. They have quarantined refugees in barbed wire camps, limiting
    assistance and denying requests to expand the space they will make
    available for camps. At the same time, your request for aid anticipates
    substantial cash payments to this uncooperative government. In
    addition, I have been under considerable pressure to release my hold on
    funds to arm their security forces. These are the same forces which
    have been widely accused of collaborating with the Serbs and abusing
    refugees. Given this track record, I am very uneasy using cash payments
    to induce cooperation.
        The Serbs created a humanitarian disaster--we are now faced with
    one of our own creation--a management disaster.
        Today, we must come to a clear agreement on just how many refugees
    need support, how long they will need it, and how the international
    community and AID intends to provide this essential assistance.
        The Kosovars have suffered long enough. The supplemental is our one
    opportunity to address this suffering--let's make sure we get it right
    this time.

                   Summary statement of Hon. J. Brian Atwood

        Senator McConnell. So with that, Mr. Atwood, why do you not
    go on with your statement? I had thought Senator Leahy might be
    here, but we should go right ahead and we will work him in when
    he arrives.
        Mr. Atwood. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want
    to address some of the issues that you have raised.
        I have a very brief statement, but I do think I should
    address some of these issues, because these are exactly the
    issues that the President's Council for Humanitarian Response
    in Kosova is wrestling with, as well. We do not disagree on
    some of these matters.
        First before getting into that, let me say that I have
    submitted a formal statement that addresses both the fiscal
    2000 request and the Kosova supplemental request, and I ask
    that that be made a part of the record.
        Senator McConnell. That will be included in the record.
        Mr. Atwood. On the situation, we have in the last 2 days
    received another 16,500 refugees; 5,200 yesterday came into
    Macedonia, 5,000 the day before, 3,800 into Albania and 2,500
    the day before.
        Let me say that this is creating major stress on the
    system. We have seen the news report of crowded refugee camps.
    We have some good news in the sense that the Macedonian
    Government really has been a lot more cooperative. A transit
    center has been built at the Blache Point border crossing.
        They have also built a new camp. The Cegrane camp is now
    going to accept an initial 5,000 people. That should alleviate
    some of the crowding that we have seen in the Stankovich camp
    that has certainly been overcrowded and is stressing the
    management system there.
        I want to just address the five points you make, because we
    have done what we call a gap analysis in the Council. And we
    are trying to do everything we can to shore up the
    international system and to identify the gaps.
        One major gap, as you suggested, is the registration
    process. We really have to get moving, especially in Albania.
    It has been less of a problem in Macedonia, where the UNHCR has
    done the registration, but there has been virtually no
    registration done in Albania. And this is where most of the
    refugees are crossing without any identification. So it is very
    important.
        They now have a system in place, and they basically need
    the resources, the people to actually do the interviews and to
    get the demographic information that is necessary.
        At that point, they will then be issued a plastic card, so
    that they have their identification and their property and
    other demographic information listed.
        The lines of food are going to be a problem. It would be a
    worse problem if we did not have sufficient food, but I want to
    commend the World Food Program for doing a wonderful job,
    Katherine Bertini and her team. She sent her first team to
    Kosova.
        I think that is significant, because we really do have
    adequate food. We are going to try to cut down the lines by
    issuing a single ration card to a family, so that a single
    family member can collect all of the food for the family rather
    than having each person stand in line. I think that will solve
    that problem.
        Children have been seriously affected because of the trauma
    that they have suffered. I have seen some of them; I was there
    last week. You look at these children and they look normal, but
    you know that they have seen things that children should not
    see. We really have to try to deal with that.
        We are trying to deal with potential disease. In some
    cases, measles have broken out, and so UNICEF is covering all
    the children in the camp with inoculations against measles. We
    have issued polio vaccine to some 5,000 children as well.
        Sanitation needs--I do not know that you ever catch up with
    this. I mean it is really a difficult problem. You are talking
    about a camp the size of 28,000 people. It is a medium-size
    town. It is not so easy to collect the garbage and make sure
    that the latrines and the waste water management systems are in
    place, but I think that they have done a reasonable job as long
    as those camps do not get overcrowded.
        There is, as you mentioned, no single agency leading. I am
    now convinced after weeks of terrible frustration that UNHCR is
    getting a grasp of this.
        Gerald Walzer, the deputy high commissioner was in
    Macedonia when I was there. He, I think, is a person that has
    more of a strategic vision.
        The people that they had in place on the ground were simply
    reacting to the day-to-day problems. They were not leading the
    international community and the NGOs. We certainly pointed that
    out.
        Sergio Vieira de Mello is now the Undersecretary for
    Humanitarian Assistance, and has sent Martin Griffith, his top
    deputy, to the region to try to organize this a little better.
    Clearly, we need to do everything we can to support UNHCR.
        I have designated a very senior person, with 37 years of
    experience in this business, to represent the President's
    Council over there, Ted Morse. He has handled every crisis,
    including Bosnia, for LISAID over the years, the return of the
    Contras, the Indo-Pakistan War in 1971. I think he is going to
    add a lot to this.
        With respect to Macedonia, I met with the President of
    Macedonia. He apologized for their performance in the early
    days of this crisis. They have tried very hard, given all the
    pressures that are on them.
        It is difficult for them, given the ethnic balance within
    their own country. There is a Serb population. There is a
    Slavic Macedonian population. There is, of course, one third of
    the population which is Albanian.
        They are very worried about this. They want to see the
    international community moving ahead with its relocation plans.
        I am pleased to say that the United States has had a team
    there looking at how we could take 20,000 people in. We are
    proceeding to build a camp in Albania that will relieve
    pressure on Macedonia. I hope that this flood of refugees does
    not once again get us into a crisis situation.
        I guess it is going to be a constant crisis. The real
    challenge will be to assure that the international system does
    not break. It is going to bend a lot, and you are going to hear
    a lot of reports over the coming weeks that we are on the verge
    of whatever, riots in the camps, or that we are on the verge of
    seeing the international system collapse.
        As long as we can stay on the verge and not allow it to
    happen, I think we will deny Mr. Milosevic a very important
    propaganda victory.
        On the supplemental itself, let me make clear that the
    resources we requested is what we feel we urgently need to
    assure that the United States can play its leadership role
    within the international system.
        Other nations are contributing generously to the
    humanitarian effort. We should be getting an important
    announcement from Japan during the visit of Prime Minister
    Obuchi.
        We are getting a lot of cooperation from countries like
    Kuwait, who have been through this experience, and the United
    Arab Emirate, and, of course, the European nations. One of the
    stories that is not told very often here is the response of the
    European Unions ECHO operation under the leadership of Emma
    Bonino. It has done a good job in this case.
        The refugees and internally displaced people of Kosova, as
    I said on Tuesday at a hearing, are not just an ancillary
    problem. They are an integral part of the NATO mission.
        That is why we want to make sure that we do receive the
    funds as part of the supplemental request, along with the
    military resources that we have requested.
        The return of Kosovars to their homes is central to our
    purpose in waging this air war, and we cannot allow Milosevic
    to get away with ethnic cleansing, cannot allow Milosevic to
    destabilize neighboring states. And we cannot allow him to
    break the international system we use to handle refugees.
        I listened on Tuesday to concerns about the readiness of
    our military forces. I think we should think about building a
    readiness component into the international system for crises
    like this.
        We were ready, at least the United States was ready, with
    food and medicine for an outflow from Kosova when this crisis
    occurred. But the refugees that came out in the early days did
    threaten to overwhelm the system. And there was tremendous
    chaos.
        The problem boils down to a fact that probably will never
    change, and that is that we cannot build refugee camps in
    sovereign neighboring countries before the refugees start
    coming across the border.
        In this case, the United Nations would have been accused of
    sanctioning or in some way implicitly supporting ethnic
    cleansing.
        In this case, had we had built the camps, we would have
    been more ready, but someone surely would have paraphrased the
    line from the movie Field of Dreams, ``Build them and they will
    come.'' We did not want them to come.
        We need to be absolutely clear that Milosevic, not NATO and
    not the international community, caused these refugees to come
    across the borders in Macedonia, Albania, and Montenegro.
        Mr. Chairman, we need all of the $566 million that is in
    the foreign ops part of the supplemental. There is an
    additional part of the international affairs account that falls
    under the State Justice Commerce Committee for operating
    expenses and the like. I believe the war crimes portion.
        The total we have asked for, in the 150 account in the
    supplemental, is $591 million. Of this amount, $566 million
    comes under your jurisdiction. But we have to have this to
    handle the refugee crisis, to alleviate the pressures on the
    front line states, investigate the war crimes now being
    committed, and to prepare the refugees to go home.
        Just very briefly, Mr. Chairman, the President has
    requested $21.3 billion to be used for programs in
    international affairs for fiscal 2000. Of that amount, AID will
    manage $7.2 billion or 34 percent.
        To save time, I am not going to go into any detail in
    defending our request. I will stand on the formal testimony
    that we have submitted.
        All I ask is that you give us adequate operating expense
    resources to manage the program. We are currently starting a
    process to reduce our staff even further in Washington so that
    we can continue to maintain the numbers of people we have
    overseas.
        I ask also that you give us as much flexibility to manage
    our resources against the needs that we see, with as much
    flexibility as possible in any case.
        Mr. Chairman, I am reluctant to say that this is my last
    appearance before you. Given the status of my nomination, I may
    be here next year. [Laughter.]

                               prepared statement

        But I want to say, in case it is the last time, that I have
    very much enjoyed working with you and with Senator Leahy,
    Senator Lautenberg, Senator Campbell, all of the members of the
    committee over the past 6 years.
        I have appreciated your support. I have appreciated your
    constructive criticism on matters such as Indonesia, certainly
    stimulated a response in many cases. And I have certainly
    appreciated your leadership.
        Thank you very, very much.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of J. Brian Atwood
        Chairman McConnell, Senator Leahy, and distinguished members of the
    committee. It's a pleasure to be here this morning. As you know, Mr.
    Chairman, I have a dual mission today: first, at Senator Stevens'
    request, to continue the discussion we began on Tuesday of the
    President's supplemental request for humanitarian assistance to the
    Kosova refugees. And, second, to present the President's budget request
    for foreign assistance programs for fiscal year 2000.
        Mr. Chairman, I know that you visited Cambodia and Indonesia last
    month, and we are grateful for the time you spent with our projects in
    those countries and for the interest you have shown in our work. Also,
    as one who recently returned from Albania and Macedonia, I thank you
    for your support of the air campaign against the Serb aggressors.
        Senator Leahy, we are also grateful for the leadership you have
    shown in many areas, including our programs to support child survival
    and microenterprise and to benefit the victims of war. We are
    particularly pleased that the Patrick J. Leahy War Victims Fund, which
    USAID administers, is now ten years old and currently has fourteen
    projects underway in nine countries. Many of its programs, of course,
    benefit the victims of land mines, not only by providing prostheses,
    but also by supporting the awareness training and public policy
    initiatives that can prevent new casualties. The Fund is a great
    humanitarian milestone, benefiting thousands of innocent victims of war
    who need and deserve our help. We are proud to be associated with it.
        This may be the last time I will testify before this subcommittee,
    after six years at USAID, and it is for me a time for reflection. Fifty
    years ago, in the aftermath of the greatest war in history, leaders
    like President Truman and General Marshall had the vision to see that
    it was in our national self-interest to help Western Europe rebuild and
    to support social and economic development all around the world. In
    time, other nations followed our leadership, and today all the leading
    nations of the world recognize the importance of international
    development--and the world is demonstrably a better place because of
    it. Our leadership has rarely faced a greater challenge than it does
    today with the crisis of the Kosova refugees.
        I have just returned from Albania and Macedonia, where I met with
    refugees, relief workers, diplomats, officials of the frontline states,
    representatives of nongovernmental organizations, and leaders of NATO.
    On the basis of what I saw and heard, I feel strongly that the refugee
    crisis must be seen in the context of the entire military and political
    crisis in the Balkans. The humanitarian aid we propose is an integral
    part of the total NATO undertaking.
        Let me repeat a point I made on Tuesday, Mr. Chairman: The refugees
    are not a byproduct of the war. They are the central fact of the war.
    Slobodan Milosevic has cruelly forced these people from their homeland,
    and when it suits his purpose he cynically turns their exodus on and
    off like a spigot. He is attempting not only to seize their homeland
    but also to use their plight as a weapon to destabilize other countries
    in the region. His actions are ruthless and criminal and cannot be
    permitted to succeed. That is why the funding we propose in the
    supplemental is intended not only to meet the urgent needs of the
    refugees but to strengthen this entire region as it confronts this
    unprecedented challenge.
        It is difficult to convey the scope of this disaster and the horror
    that has been inflicted on these innocent people. Something like
    700,000 men, women and children have been forced from their homes and
    have crossed the borders into Albania, Macedonia and Montenegro. No one
    knows how many are still in hiding in Kosova--estimates go as high as
    800,000 or more--or how many have been executed.
        The refugees are in bad shape, physically and psychologically. They
    have been traumatized by the brutality of Serb military forces. Many
    have seen their friends and loved ones killed and their homes burned to
    the ground. They have been herded onto trains, or forced to flee on
    foot, and deported from their country. Many have been tortured. Parents
    are desperately concerned about the fate of their children, and
    thousands of children have become separated from their parents. By some
    estimates, two-thirds of those in the camps are children. To see these
    people's courage in the face of such adversity is to realize that we
    must pursue our humanitarian mission just as vigorously as we pursue
    the military actions that will end this aggression and bring these
    people home.
        I cannot say enough about the heroic performance of the aid workers
    I met. Some are American, others are from many other nations, and all
    are working tirelessly to bring life and hope to the refugees. I'm
    particularly proud of USAID's two Disaster Assistance Response Teams
    that are in the area, one in Albania and one in Macedonia. These teams
    serve as our eyes and ears on the ground, gathering invaluable
    information in support of our relief efforts.
        Throughout the region, relief workers are performing with
    exceptional courage in conditions of great personal danger. When I was
    in Albania, the relief community was deeply saddened by the death of
    two Americans, David and Penny McCall, board members of Refugees
    International, who were killed in an auto accident on the road to
    Kukes, along with the organization's European representative, Yvette
    Pierpaoli. They died as they had lived, while helping those in need.
    Their dedication was representative of thousands of relief workers
    around the world who place themselves in harm's way every day to
    relieve human suffering.
        The relief effort has also seen a great outpouring of support from
    the American people. On April 1, USAID set up a web site to provide up
    to the minute information on the crisis and also to make available to
    list of private, nonprofit groups working in the region to those who
    want to donate funds. Thus far, more than 263,000 people have accessed
    the web site. Also, we and the Federal Emergency Management Agency have
    set up an 800 number--1-800-USAID-RELIEF--which lists organizations to
    which donations can be made. Since April 5, this phone bank has
    received 45,000 phone calls from potential donors. USAID has also
    produced a public service announcement, in which First Lady Hillary
    Rodham Clinton appealed for donations to support the refugees; during
    its first week on the air the announcement was seen by an estimated
    twenty-four million Americans. We are extremely grateful for this
    support from the American people, as we are for the bipartisan support
    the relief effort has received in Congress.
        As you know, the President on April 19 sent Congress a $6 billion
    emergency supplemental proposal to fund both humanitarian programs to
    aid the refugees and the military campaign against the Serbian
    aggressors. That supplemental request includes $591 million to be used
    for Function 150 humanitarian assistance for the refugees and for
    economic support for the frontline states for the rest of this fiscal
    year. These funds would support programs carried out by both USAID and
    the Department of State. The $591 million includes $386 million for
    humanitarian assistance to the refugees, such as food, shelter, water
    and medicine, and also to support essential programs carried out by
    nongovernmental organizations; it also includes $150 million for
    assistance to the frontline states; $30 million for security
    assistance; and $25 million for diplomatic operations of the Department
    of State and other agencies in the region. These requests were spelled
    out in the statement I presented on Tuesday and I will be glad to
    discuss them in more detail today.
        For now, let me say that, based on what I saw in Albania and
    Macedonia, I add my voice to the many others, in Congress and across
    the nation, who believe it is imperative for Congress to pass this
    legislation and for us to move with unity and determination to meet
    both the humanitarian and military challenges we face in the Balkans.
        Even before the Kosova crisis, we had seen an outstanding example
    of American humanitarian leadership in the aftermath of Hurricane
    Mitch. The hurricane, and the flooding it caused, took at least nine
    thousand lives and did billions of dollars in damage to homes, farms,
    schools, health clinics, roads and entire communities in Central
    America last October. The United States, with bipartisan support in
    Congress, and working with other nations and private organizations,
    moved quickly to provide food, shelter and medicine. Now plans are
    underway for a massive reconstruction effort. The damage that these
    counties suffered came as several of them had emerged from civil war
    and were building democracies and open markets. It is therefore all the
    more urgent that we help them get back onto the road to political
    stability and economic growth, and I urge your support of the
    supplemental appropriation that the President has requested for
    reconstruction in Central America.
        Mr. Chairman, for fiscal year 2000, the President has requested
    $21.3 billion for programs in international affairs. Of that amount,
    USAID will manage $7.2 billion or 34 percent, which includes both
    programs that we administer and those we administer in cooperation with
    the Department of State and other agencies. The fiscal year 2000 USAID
    budget request is an increase of $118 million, or less than two
    percent, over the previous year's appropriation.
                       sustainable development assistance
        The Administration is requesting a total of $1.848 billion for
    Sustainable Development programs in three accounts: the Development
    Assistance Account, at $780.4 million; the Child Survival/Diseases and
    Basic Education Account, at $555 million; and the Development Fund for
    Africa Account, at $512.6 million. The overall request is $109 million
    more than the amount appropriated in fiscal year 1999, excluding the
    fiscal year 1999 supplemental for Child Survival.
        Development Assistance Account.--The requested $780.4 million is an
    increase from $733.86 million appropriated in fiscal year 1999
    (excluding Africa). Of this amount, $26.5 million will be used to
    address the Asian financial crisis. This account supports programs that
    promote economic growth and agricultural development, human capacity
    development, environmental sustainability, and democracy and governance
    in some of the poorest countries in the world.
        Environmental funds, with overall funding of $290 million, support
    international efforts to reduce the threat of global climate change,
    conserve biological diversity, support sound energy services, and
    manage natural resources. Our environmental programs continue to be the
    best in the world, helping nations achieve economic growth while
    reducing greenhouse gasses and cleaning up urban pollution. Last year
    USAID launched its five-year, $1 billion Climate Change Initiative, to
    carry out President Clinton's commitment to reduce the threats posed by
    climate change in developing and transition nations. Through programs
    in 44 countries, we have helped developing nations to participate in
    the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, to decrease
    net greenhouse gas emissions, and to adapt to climate vulnerability.
    The budget request includes $150 million from all USAID-managed
    accounts for this initiative, of which $112 million is Development
    Assistance.
        Economic growth funds budgeted at $458 million, will expand and
    strengthen private markets, support agricultural development and
    microenterprise programs, and build access to economic opportunity for
    the rural and urban poor.
        The importance of agriculture was underlined last year both by
    Hurricane Mitch, which devastated farming in Central America, and by
    the Asian financial crisis, which has increased food insecurity in that
    region. We continue to work closely with various U.S. private
    agricultural interests to develop a stronger public-private partnership
    and also gain access to markets for U.S. business. The new alliance
    with food companies for the worldwide Vitamin A program is an example
    of that partnership. We are refocusing on the links between
    agriculture, economic growth and food security. As was underscored at
    the 1996 World Food Summit, there are an estimated 800 million
    malnourished people in the world, and the United States, with the
    international community, is committed to cutting that figure in half in
    the next twenty years.
        USAID's microenterprise program, budgeted at $135 million, from all
    accounts, works to increase the flow of credit to small businesses in
    developing countries. Helping poor but enterprising men and women build
    their own businesses is a key element of USAID's grassroots growth
    strategy. The microenterprise initiative started in 1994 with 331,000
    low-income borrowers; in fiscal year 1997, USAID's grants contributed
    to an estimated 1.4 million loans. About two-thirds of the recipients
    were women, and most of the loans were for $300 or less. A person with
    no collateral might first receive a loan of $50, and when that was
    repaid another loan of $100 might be extended. Often, these small loans
    can change people's lives.
        In recent years, as loans have been repaid, a multiplier effect has
    taken place, as the same money is used over and over to make new loans
    and help new people. For example, the 1.4 million poor people who had
    active loans from USAID-supported institutions in fiscal year 1997
    represented an increase of 47 percent from the previous year. During
    the same period, the value of those loans increased from $301 million
    to $645 million, or 113 percent. Microenterprise development has
    emerged as an agency priority because it can so often help poor people
    work their way out of poverty, and we appreciate the strong bipartisan
    support it has enjoyed in Congress.
        Family planning is budgeted for $400 million from all accounts,
    including $355 million in Development Assistance. Well over fifty
    million couples in the developing world use family planning as a direct
    result of USAID-supported programs. We estimate that as a result of
    USAID population programs there were 7.9 million fewer unwanted
    pregnancies, 3.2 million fewer abortions, 3.8 million fewer unwanted
    births, and 15,000 fewer maternal deaths last year. Since the mid-
    1960s, fertility rates in countries where USAID has been a major family
    planning donor--such as Indonesia, Bangladesh, Colombia, Mexico, Kenya
    and Egypt--have declined by more than a third.
        Human Capacity Development, budgeted at $147 million, of which $110
    million is requested within the Child Survival, Diseases and Basic
    Education Account, and $37 million is requested within Development
    Assistance, focuses on education as a central element of development.
    The program recognizes that for many poor people, and particularly
    women, illiteracy and the lack of a basic education are insurmountable
    barriers to a decent life. USAID is working with policymakers in
    several counties in Africa and Latin America to begin classroom
    programs designed to improve the quality of education for the poor and
    particularly for girls and women.
        The status that women occupy in most developing countries not only
    contributes to individual suffering, but also represents a wasted
    resource and holds back economic growth. We are working to change this
    with technical assistance and leadership provided by our Global
    Bureau's Office of Women in Development (WID), which in 2000 is again
    budgeted at about $10 million. WID's goals include overcoming gender-
    based constraints to economic growth; improving education for girls;
    protecting women's legal rights; and creating greater consideration of
    gender in all aspects of the agency's work.
        Democracy and Governance programs, budgeted at $149 million in
    Development Fund for Africa and Development Assistance funds, work to
    build democracy, support human rights, strengthen the rule of law,
    create a strong, politically active civil society, and combat
    corruption around the world. Never before in human history have more
    nations embraced democracy. More than fifty have successfully made the
    transition in the past fifteen years. But many fledgling democracies
    are vulnerable to military coups, corruption, organized crime, civil
    strife and economic chaos. Such counties are the focus of programs
    carried out by USAID's Center for Democracy and Governance and by our
    overseas missions.
        Child Survival and Disease Programs.--The fiscal year 2000 request
    includes $555 million for child survival and disease programs, an
    increase of $10 million from the fiscal year 1999 level, excluding the
    supplemental. Of that amount, $445 million will be used for child
    survival, HIV/AIDS, infectious diseases and other health programs, and
    $110 million will be used for basic education. Since 1985, with the
    support of Congress, USAID has spent $3 billion on child survival
    programs. Experts say that these programs save more than three million
    lives a year, and have helped drop infant mortality rates in the
    developing world to their lowest levels ever.
        The child survival request includes $25 million for the Polio
    Eradication Initiative. We have played a leadership role in the near-
    eradication of polio from the world. The Americas were certified polio
    free in 1994, and the number of reported cases elsewhere in the world
    has declined in the past decade from about 35,000 to about 3000 last
    year, with total eradication within view. In this campaign, USAID and
    Rotary International forged the most successful public-private
    partnership for public health in history. Last year, more than 450
    million children were immunized against polio during national
    immunization days. In the largest public health event in history, India
    immunized more than 130 million children on a single day, December 7,
    1997.
        In the past year, in another area of child survival, we have worked
    with other nations, private companies and international organizations,
    to start a worldwide program to address the vitamin A deficiency that
    plagues many developing nations and costs millions of lives. Last
    month, the leaders of about fifteen major U.S. corporations met in
    Washington with Hillary Rodham Clinton to pledge their support for the
    program, which will include fortifying the food that children eat. In
    1998, the VITA Alliance operated in eleven countries, and reached an
    estimated twelve million children and their mothers. We estimate that
    this program will save 650,000 lives each year by 2005.
        This year USAID is proposing a new initiative that would be a first
    step in a global campaign against abusive child labor, an issue that I
    know is of great interest to Mr. Harkin and other members of the
    committee. It has been estimated that at least 250 million children are
    performing child labor around the world, many of them as young as eight
    or nine. School Works! will be a focused and coordinated effort to
    combat abusive child labor by helping communities and governments find
    long-term sustainable educational solutions aimed at keeping kids in
    school and out of hazardous work. USAID will establish pilot projects
    in regions with the worst record of abuse. The $10 million requested in
    fiscal year 2000 would fund three-year pilot activities.
        School Works! is the first time that the U.S. Government has made
    the reduction of child labor through improved access to basic education
    a specific focus of U.S. development assistance. USAID already invests
    $100 million yearly in basic education activities which target poor
    children in the developing world--those most at risk of becoming
    involved in abusive and exploitative working situations. School Works!
    will complement ongoing activities of the International Labor
    Organization's International Program for the Elimination of Child
    Labor.
        We are requesting $10 million for a three-year program, with most
    of the money to be used to support several pilot projects around the
    world. The projects would include outreach and incentives to parents,
    improved teacher training, quality learning opportunities, and work
    with local communities. The goal would be to keep young people in
    school, or to get them back to school, at least to age fourteen.
        USAID has been a leader in maternal health and nutrition, providing
    innovative in-service training for thousands of health workers, and
    other programs in more than twenty countries. We expect to spend about
    $50 million in fiscal year 2000 for improving maternal health and
    reducing deaths as a result of pregnancy and childbirth. USAID works
    with international partners and other donor nations to support programs
    of nutrition, birth preparedness, treatment, and postpartum and newborn
    care. Since 1985, such programs have contributed to dramatic reductions
    in infant mortality rates. Immunization programs have reduced deaths
    among children under five by twenty to twenty-five percent. By its
    support of the development and delivery of oral rehydration solution
    (ORS), USAID has prevented one million childhood deaths from diarrheal
    diseases each year.
        We continue to be the world leader in the battle against infectious
    diseases like tuberculosis, polio, malaria and HIV/AIDS. This budget
    requests $127 million to deal with HIV/AIDS, an increase of $2 million
    over the 1999 appropriation, excluding the supplemental. During my time
    at USAID, the agency has become the lead donor for the response to the
    global HIV pandemic. We have spent nearly $1 billion dollars for the
    prevention and mitigation of this epidemic in the developing world.
    USAID presently supports over 300 major activities in 47 countries
    around the world and over the next five years we expect to provide life
    saving services to over 50 million men and women.
        The worldwide AIDS pandemic is extremely serious, but there have
    been signs of success in the battle against it. We now have abundant
    evidence that public health programs can change sexual behavior and
    thereby save lives. In Senegal, Philippines and Indonesia, early,
    comprehensive HIV intervention programs that USAID supported have
    helped prevent a major epidemic. In another set of countries--Uganda,
    Dominican Republic and Thailand--intensive HIV/AIDS programs were
    launched after major epidemics had begun, but the number of new
    infections is actually coming down. By our work in HIV/AIDS prevention
    abroad, we are not only reducing death and suffering there, we are
    lessening the dangers to our own country.
                               regional programs
        Development Fund for Africa.--USAID is renewing its request for a
    separate appropriation for the Development Fund for Africa, or DFA.
    This reflects the high priority the Administration places on achieving
    sustainable growth in Africa, and has pursued with bipartisan support
    in Congress. The request for this account is $512.6 million. The total
    request for Africa of $818 million, which includes $232 million from
    the Child Survival and Diseases Program and $73 million from the
    Economic Support Fund, reflects the President's intent to return to
    historically high levels of support in Africa. The DFA request includes
    $233 million for economic growth and agricultural development, $34
    million for human capacity development (other than basic education),
    $73 million for population programs, $99 million for management of the
    environment, and $72 million for building democracy. Within these
    categories, $45 million (an increase of $15 million over fiscal year
    1999) is included for an expanded African Food Security Initiative.
    This is the ten-year initiative announced by President Clinton during
    his 1998 trip to Africa. It is part of our response to the goals of the
    1996 World Food Summit. Two goals underlie U.S. foreign policy in
    Africa: to accelerate Africa's integration into the global economy and
    to combat serious transnational security threats, including HIV/AIDS
    and outbreaks of violence. In Africa today, we see extreme poverty,
    widespread hunger, a severe HIV/AIDS problem, political instability and
    war, and yet we also see economic growth and movement toward democracy.
    Great opportunities for progress exist, and we will continue to support
    improved agriculture, to work for an improved environment for
    investment and trade, and to encourage civil society and democracy.
        Latin America and the Caribbean.--The budget request for the Latin
    America and Caribbean region for fiscal year 2000 totals $519.7
    million. Of this, $233 million comes from the Developmental Assistance
    Account, $76.2 million comes from the Child Survival and Disease
    Account, and $160.5 million is from the Economic Support Fund. In
    addition, $50 million is requested by the Department of State, for
    programs managed by USAID, from International Narcotics Control funds.
        The funds will support programs to carry out the goals of the
    Summit of the Americas and its follow-up process. Additionally, the
    request will contribute to reconstruction in the Central American and
    Caribbean countries hard-hit by Hurricanes Mitch and Georges. The funds
    will also be used to promote democracy and human rights, to expand
    economic growth, to reduce illegal immigration into the U.S., for
    health care and education programs and to support sound environmental
    practices.
        Asia and the Near East.--The Administration is requesting a total
    of about $2.4 billion for Asia and the Near East programs for fiscal
    year 2000. Of this amount, $231 million is from the Development
    Assistance Account, $92.5 million is from the Child Survival Account,
    and $2.07 billion is from the Economic Support Fund. These funds will
    be used to continue support for the Middle East peace process, and to
    finance programs that facilitate economic reforms and increase access
    to markets, with particular emphasis on those countries hardest hit by
    the Asian financial crisis. The goal is to raise growth rates, create
    jobs, and promote the prosperity that is essential to free market
    economies. The funds will also be used to reduce population growth,
    improve maternal health, and combat the spread of HIV/AIDS; to improve
    energy efficiency, urban waste management and water resource
    management; improve the management of forest and coastal resources, and
    to reduce the growth of greenhouse gas emissions.
                        the freedom support act account
        The fiscal year 2000 request for the FREEDOM Support Act for the
    New Independent States totals $1.032 billion. This includes $241
    million for the Expanded Threat Reduction Assistance Initiative, which
    will address security questions that may have been worsened by the
    economic crisis. The request for Freedom Support Act development funds
    totals $791 million, or $10 million less than the fiscal year 1999
    appropriation, not including emergency funding. Funds will be used to
    support the transition to democracy and free markets in the former
    Soviet states, including help for elections in several NIS countries
    this year. The NIS region has been hit hard by the Russian financial
    crisis. Programs will emphasize support for NGOs and the private
    sector, while reducing assistance to central governments.
                  support for east european democracy account
        The Support for Eastern European Democracy (SEED) Act is the
    cornerstone of U.S. assistance to Eastern Europe and the Baltic States.
    SEED is a transitional program, intended to aid Central and Eastern
    European countries through the difficult passage to democracy and
    market economies. The fiscal year 2000 SEED request is $393 million,
    $37 million below the 1999 level. The request includes $175 million for
    reconstruction and democratic reform in Bosnia, $20 million below the
    1999 level. The reduction is justified by the progress already made and
    by our commitment to a gradual reduction of assistance.
        The request includes $218 million for other counties in the
    Southern tier, and for regional programs throughout Eastern Europe.
    These funds will be used for humanitarian support, community building,
    local elections and support of an independent media. The budget
    reflects the continuing shift in program activities from ``graduating''
    Northern tier countries to Southern tier countries that began moving
    forward on their political and economic transformation more recently.
    Hungary and Latvia graduated from the SEED program in fiscal year 1998.
    Lithuania and Slovakia will graduate in fiscal year 1999. In fiscal
    year 2000, Poland will graduate, and we are requesting no new funds for
    Northern tier country programs. Our focus will be support for
    democratic transition and market reforms in Romania, Bulgaria and
    Albania, transitions crucial to our goal of long-term peace and
    stability in the Balkans.
        SEED is a transition program and we have a graduation plan for
    closing USAID missions. Still, it may take a generation for some
    formerly communist countries to make the transition to democracy and
    open markets. That is why USAID has proposed the Trust for Civil
    Society in Central and Eastern Europe. This is a proposed public-
    private partnership between our government and four American
    foundations. The Trust would offer challenge grants, training, and
    other services to non-profit organizations that would serve as a force
    for transparency, accountability and democracy in the region. It would
    operate for fifteen years, and USAID would match private contributions
    up to $50 million over a multi-year period. The Trust would enable us
    to continue as a force for democratic change in the area even after we
    no longer have missions there.
                             usaid credit programs
        USAID's credit programs address a variety of sustainable
    development objectives, including economic development, a sustainable
    environment, and protecting human health. USAID believes there are many
    instances when development priorities can best be funded through
    credit, especially in emerging market counties and those moving toward
    graduation status. Credit programs use the leveraging of private sector
    resources to support sustainable development and to enable USAID to
    reach people it would not otherwise be able to reach. The Urban and
    Environmental Credit Program, budgeted at $8 million for subsidy costs
    and administration, provides loan guarantees that help market based
    financial institutions and instruments needed to address key
    development issues such as the adequate provision of water, sewer,
    sanitation and housing for the urban poor. The budget also requests
    authority to transfer up to $15 million to the Development Credit
    Authority. We are working with OMB on the certification required by
    Congress and hope to obtain it soon. DCA authority, unlike other credit
    programs, is not restricted to any one sector and can be used where
    credit is the best vehicle to achieve development goals. The Micro and
    Small Enterprise Development Program request is $2 million for credit
    subsidies and program administration.
                   international disaster assistance account
        The fiscal year 2000 request for International Disaster Assistance
    is $220 million, a $20 million increase over the fiscal year 1999
    appropriated level. This request includes $165 million for the Office
    of Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA) to support emergency relief and
    rehabilitation programs in response to natural and manmade disasters
    and other emergencies that displace large numbers of people. This
    compares to $160 million in fiscal year 1999. In the post-Cold War era,
    there have been a growing number of civil conflicts, and OFDA has spent
    significantly more time and money confronting humanitarian needs caused
    by man rather than by nature. Our government's ability to respond
    rapidly to emergencies is known and respected worldwide, and was seen
    in Central America after Hurricane Mitch, and is now seen again during
    the Kosova crisis. The budget request reflects a $5 million increase in
    disaster assistance to assist victims of nuclear, biological and
    chemical incidents abroad.
        The Office of Transition Initiatives (OTI) is budgeted at $55
    million for fiscal year 2000, up from $40 million in fiscal year 1999.
    This $55 million is in fact a straightlining of the fiscal year 1999
    budget, which included $40 million of Disaster Assistance money and $15
    million of Development Assistance for Indonesia. OTI was established in
    1994, in response to the fact that, in today's world, many nations are
    undergoing the difficult passage from war to peace. The United States
    has a vital interest in seeing nations successfully complete those
    transitions. OTI focuses on the recovery from disasters brought on by
    political conflict, such as those in Bosnia, Rwanda, Philippines and
    Guatemala. OTI has sponsored programs to help former combatants put
    down their arms and reenter civilian life, often aided by programs of
    education and job training.
        When countries emerge from war, the presence of land mines may
    hinder or prevent refugees or displaced persons from returning home.
    Because bridges, roads and farmlands are typically targeted, removing
    mines is often a first step toward economic recovery--as well as to
    ending needless human suffering. Through the Office of Transition
    Initiatives, USAID supports programs in public mine awareness, mine
    removal, training in mine removal, and assistance to the victims of
    land mines.
        In recent years, OTI has supported anti-mine initiatives in several
    countries, and the State Department has programs as well. In the former
    Yugoslavia, we funded the Landmine Survivors' Network to be an advocate
    for landmine survivors. In Angola, nearly two million people have been
    reached by mine awareness programs, more than eight hundred have been
    trained in mine removal techniques, and as a result mine accidents have
    been reduced. In Rwanda, USAID and the Defense Department have jointly
    funded a demining program that has thus far cleared more than 15,000
    mines on more than a thousand square kilometers of land.
        In Honduras and Nicaragua, floods and mudslides unleashed by
    Hurricane Mitch caused many land mines to be exposed and moved about,
    creating new dangers there. We are therefore gratified that Senate bill
    544, the Central America and the Caribbean Emergency Disaster Recovery
    Fund, includes a minimum of $2 million for clearing unexploded
    landmines and other unexploded ordnance in those two nations.
                         economic support fund account
        The Economic Support Fund, budgeted at $2.389 billion, will be used
    to support the Middle East peace process, to assist countries in
    transition, to promote democracy worldwide, and to promote stability in
    such countries as Ireland and Cyprus. Funds will also be used to
    support the Holocaust Fund and the Human Rights Fund, and to respond to
    global crises and such development priorities as child survival, public
    health, climate change and biodiversity. The request does not include
    the supplemental being requested in connection with the implementation
    of the Wye Memorandum to support Middle East peace.
        In summary, the request includes:
      --$1.943 billion to support the Middle East peace process. This
            includes $930 million for Israel ($150 million below fiscal
            year 1999) which will be used to promote economic reforms and
            reinforce the peace process; $715 million for Egypt ($60
            million below fiscal year 1999) to promote economic growth,
            open markets, and population and environmental goals; $150
            million for Jordan, for water management, economic growth and
            primary health care; and $100 million for the West Bank and
            Gaza for economic growth, water management, better governance,
            and community services and health care.
      --$126 million for other portions of the Asia/Near East region: for
            Asian economic recovery and bilateral programs in East Asia and
            South Asia; these include programs in family planning,
            democratic transition, health care, and legal reform.
      --$161 million for Latin America and the Caribbean: for Haiti,
            Guatemala, democracy programs and the Peru-Ecuador border
            dispute. One priority is support for the themes of the Summit
            of the Americas.
      --$45 million for Ireland, Cyprus and Eastern Europe.
      --$73 million in sub-Saharan Africa.
                               operating expenses
        The fiscal year 2000 request for Operating Expenses is $507.7
    million, which is used to manage USAID's $7.2 billion program. Of this
    amount, $7.7 million is for costs associated with the Office of
    Security, previously funded by the Inspector General, for which the
    Agency is assuming responsibility this year. The balance of the
    Operating Expense request--$500 million--covers the cost of salaries,
    benefits, and other administrative costs associated with USAID's
    worldwide programs, including efforts to improve the agency's
    information technology and financial management capabilities and
    improve training for agency staff.
        Factoring in other funding sources, such as local currency trust
    funds and prior year funds carried forward, the increase from fiscal
    year 1999 to fiscal year 2000 in funds available for total recurring
    operating costs is less than 2 percent. With a projected fiscal year
    2000 Federal Pay Raise of 4.4 percent, the impact on fiscal year 2000
    costs of the fiscal year 1999 Federal pay raise, combined with the
    impact of inflation in Washington and overseas on the cost of rent,
    utilities, travel, security guards, and other support costs, actual
    costs will increase considerably more than 2 percent.
        To accommodate these increased costs, USAID will continue its
    efforts to reduce costs and increase efficiency in order to meet the
    most critical management challenges still facing us. These efforts
    include examining the potential for consolidating support activities in
    fewer locations, greater reliance on International Cooperative
    Administrative Support Services where this system will provide cost
    savings, and reducing redundant or lower priority work in Washington.
        However, these economies alone will not be sufficient to offset
    expected cost increases, which means that the Agency will have to
    manage with fewer staff in order to operate at the requested level.
    Given that USAID has already reduced its U.S. direct hire staff by 35
    percent since start of this Administration, determining precisely which
    parts of the Agency will have to absorb further reductions, and the
    size of each reduction, will be a difficult task. I have been actively
    engaged with senior managers of the Agency in reviewing various options
    for distributing further staff reductions, and I want to ensure that
    these reductions are made in a way that minimizes the impact on our
    most critical operations.
                      new management system (nms) and y2k
        A year ago, we received an independent assessment of NMS. The
    report detailed many recommendations for modernizing our information
    systems. Our analysis indicated that we couldn't implement the
    recommendations, including replacing our core accounting system, by
    September 1999. We knew we had a great deal of work to repair Year 2000
    system problems.
        I directed that we focus our information technology resources on
    three priorities: completing Y2K repairs for our mission-critical
    systems; moving to replace the core financial system; and ensuring that
    the NMS and our other systems continue to support our Agency's
    operations.
        We strengthened our capacity to manage our information systems work
    by obtaining the services of a single prime contractor. We have
    improved the performance of NMS in support of agency operations in
    Washington. Our fiscal year-end closing process occurred a month
    earlier than the previous fiscal year and our financial reports were
    more accurately and efficiently prepared. The work on replacing the NMS
    core accounting system has been comprehensive and systematic. We are in
    the process of completing an agency-wide architecture or blueprint to
    guide our decision on this investment. We have completed an extensive
    review of our core accounting business processes. We have made progress
    in simplifying them so that we will be able to use a commercial, core
    accounting software product with fewer modifications. We transferred
    some of our core accounting functions to another federal agency and a
    private sector bank. We are creating a strong program management office
    under our new Chief Financial Officer to implement the new core
    accounting system.
        It will not be possible to modernize or replace NMS and related
    systems all at once because of resource constraints. We are working on
    a modernization plan for our information systems using products from
    the commercial marketplace and at other federal agencies. We will
    sequence our investments in manageable increments to assure success. We
    are committed to implement a new core financial system in Washington
    during fiscal year 2000 as the first incremental investment. Phased
    implementation overseas will occur in fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year
    2002. The other components of NMS will also be addressed in this plan.
        Y2K Compliance: Making our critical systems Y2K compliant is our
    top IT priority. As of today, four of five such systems are renovated
    and are being tested. We had planned that three of these systems would
    be fully implemented by the end of March but because of problems
    encountered during the testing phase it will take until May to
    implement the four systems. The fifth, NMS, is the largest and most
    complex of our mission-critical systems and Y2K repair work is almost
    completed. We hope to finish testing and implement the Y2K compliant
    version of NMS in July 1999, earlier than we had planned. The
    acceleration of the compliance date is due to our receipt of additional
    resources from the special Y2K supplemental.
        Overseas, all of our field posts have reviewed their internal
    operations. We have set aside up to five percent of our development
    assistance program funds in fiscal year 1999 for use in correcting Y2K
    problems discovered in IT applications that are part of our assistance
    programs. We have contacted more than 50 overseas posts to identify Y2K
    problems and develop solutions. These surveys also review the host-
    country environment to determine risks that might affect USAID
    operations. We are working closely with the Department of State and
    other agencies to assure that our operations will continue on January
    1, 2000.
                                    security
        We are concerned about the security of our missions overseas in the
    aftermath of last year's bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. The $3 billion
    advance appropriation requested by the Department of State addresses
    its planning for new construction and rehabilitation of about 45
    diplomatic posts overseas. It does not explicitly include USAID-related
    costs. We are working with OMB and the Department of State to
    prioritize other planned projects, to identify specific USAID funding
    requirements, and to ensure that USAID is included in all future
    planning and funding requests.
        We plan to use $27.5 million in security supplemental funds
    appropriated by fiscal year 1999 to accomplish the most urgent re-
    location and security rehabilitation projects abroad. These funds have
    been allocated for enhanced security or relocation costs in Rabat,
    Luanda, Nairobi, and Kampala, with other locations under review; also
    for design or land purchase costs for new office buildings in Nairobi
    and Dar Es Salaam; and other security upgrades worldwide. Additionally,
    we have conducted a comprehensive review of all 82 current USAID
    facilities overseas. We expect that in the future, as the Department of
    State constructs new facilities that meet all security standards, USAID
    will be co-located in these new facilities.
        With regard to our new offices in the Ronald Reagan Building, we
    recognized from the first that the building is required to be open to
    the public, as was provided for by Congress. However, in the portion of
    the building occupied by USAID, the security requirements established
    after the Oklahoma City bombing have been implemented, including 24-
    hour armed guard presence; package and visitor screening; and 24-hour
    closed circuit camera and alarm coverage. We continue to work with GSA
    to strengthen the overall security of the Ronald Reagan Building.
                                the results act
        USAID is committed to managing for results and we have reformed the
    agency to focus more on results management. We have an interactive
    process that seeks to make marginal steps when experience and cost-
    benefit analysis justifies change. Over the past year, reporting of
    performance data by all operating units increased by a third. Despite
    challenges to performance reporting and data quality, there is a high
    level of agreement among technical staff reviewing field performance.
    The agency's results reporting system is not yet where it should be;
    this is in part due to a lack of timely, comprehensive and quality
    economic and social data available about developing countries. Our
    missions continue to process more information and we continue to
    consult with OMB, the Department of State and Congress on options for
    improvement.
                                   conclusion
        It has been a privilege to head the U.S. Agency for International
    Development at this challenging time in its--and the world's--history.
    I don't expect ever to meet a more talented and dedicated group of men
    and women than my colleagues at USAID.
        During the past six years, we have seen our share of controversy
    and criticism--that is inevitable. But we also need to step back and
    consider the remarkable progress we have made. In the past a half
    century, working with successive Congresses and with other nations, our
    efforts have played an important role in expanding the developing
    world's food production, eradicating smallpox and nearly eradicating
    polio, increasing literacy by fifty percent, reducing the average
    number of children born to women in the developing world from six to
    three, increasing life expectancy by more than twenty years, and
    expanding the world's wealth from a 1948 global GNP of $4.4 trillion--
    measured in 1998 dollars--to $47.6 trillion last year.
        There has never before been such progress in any fifty-year period
    in human history--and it exists in large part because of American
    leadership. During the past six years, despite severe budget
    restraints, we have been able to maintain American leadership in
    foreign assistance. We provide only about ten percent of all of the
    developed world's foreign aid, but other countries continue to follow
    our lead in defining the goals and techniques of assistance.
        Perhaps the most important lesson we have learned is simply that
    strong, democratic and transparent institutions are the soundest
    vehicles for social progress. There is no limit to what we might
    achieve in the 21st century if we are willing to invest in the lessons
    of the past fifty years. To turn away from the great experiment we
    embarked on in 1948 would be a tragic mistake. The post-Cold War era
    offers unlimited possibilities for American political and economic
    leadership. If we turn away from the developing world, we invite more
    failed nations, more suffering, more disease, more civil wars and
    terrorism. We risk exposing ourselves to dangers from which all our
    military might cannot protect us.
        In many situations, the military must be our last line of defense,
    but diplomacy and development should be the first line, and often they
    can prevent the need for military action. I hope to see the day when
    our foreign assistance budget is far greater than it is today. I think
    that is the best investment we could make in the future of our children
    and grandchildren.
        I am proud to have spent these six years with an agency that does
    so much to improve the lives of people all over the world and I thank
    you and many others in Congress for all that you have contributed to
    our success.

                                    refugees

        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Mr. Atwood. We have enjoyed
    working with you and wish you well in your new assignment.
        The policy of taking refugees long distances from Kosova, I
    gather that the United States has agreed to take 20,000. I have
    some serious doubts as to whether that is a good policy. Will
    any of the 20,000 want to go back at some subsequent point? And
    if they do not want to go back, what will be our response?
        Mr. Atwood. Well, we have serious doubts about it as well,
    but we do not see any alternative to trying to relieve the
    pressure on the neighboring states.
        The number 20,000 is a very small percentage of what we
    estimate to be 1.5 million of both refugees and internally
    displaced people. We may end up with a worst-case of 1.5
    million.
        The neighboring states, I do not think, alone can tolerate
    that. And so, therefore, we have engaged with our NATO allies
    and with other countries around the world in an effort to put
    in place what we call a relocation program.
        It is only at this stage, 20,000 out of 1.5 million is not
    a high percentage, but it was important in the early days when
    we made that commitment to send a message to Macedonia, in
    particular, that we were prepared to share some of the burden
    here.
        The 20,000 will come to the United States. We believe that
    they want to return home. We are----
        Senator McConnell. How will they be chosen, these lucky
    20,000 that are likely to become citizens?
        Mr. Atwood. They will have family relationships here. I
    will ignore the last part of your comment. [Laughter.]
        Senator McConnell. Well, it is a virtual certainty, is it
    not, Mr. Atwood?
        Mr. Atwood. I will not concede that, because we are going
    to do everything we can to encourage them to return, but they
    do come here with all of the privileges of people who are in
    that status and they would have a right to apply for----
        Senator McConnell. Right. And that is sort of my point. I
    mean to the extent that we allow Milosevic to succeed in effect
    in his effort to depopulate Kosova, it seems to me, we are sort
    of playing into his hands.
        Mr. Atwood. We are doing this because it is necessary to do
    it to assure that we do not give Milosevic yet another victory,
    frankly. If the government of Macedonia were to collapse, I
    think that would be a major victory for Mr. Milosevic.
        We are not doing this under any blackmail circumstance. We
    know what the capacity of these governments is in the region to
    take people. Our hope is that people will stay in the region.
    The number 20,000 is a small number.
        Senator McConnell. Tell me again: What percentage of the
    total number of refugees outside the country at the moment--we
    know there are going to be a lot more coming--are going long
    distances from the area?
        Mr. Atwood. At this juncture, about 40,000. You say long
    distances; I mean Canada, Australia, and New Zealand have also
    offered to take people in smaller numbers.
        Senator McConnell. How many are going, for example, to
    Britain, Germany, and France?
        Mr. Atwood. So far, about 30,000 have gone in that
    direction.
        Senator McConnell. All three together?
        Mr. Atwood. There are 10,000 to Germany and--that is right.
    That is right. And other countries in Europe, Scandinavian
    countries as well. It is not a large portion. And we still
    believe that it is much better to keep more in the region.
        Senator McConnell. Yes.
        Mr. Atwood. And UNHCR believes that as well. And part of
    this relates to UNHCR referrals, so we do not expect to see a
    large number going distances.
        We want them to return home and believe this will not be a
    long war. We are not talking about a war that is going to last
    for a year, so our hope is that all of the people that will
    come here will return. But, we do concede that many may choose
    to stay.
        Senator McConnell. Well----
        Mr. Atwood. We think that is a more humanitarian way of
    handling it. We had originally come up with the idea of
    Guantanamo. Again, it was because we needed, you know, to come
    up with an answer to relieve the pressure on the government of
    Macedonia. That was the quickest answer we could come up with
    at the time.
        We have reconsidered that and believe it is a more
    humanitarian approach to take people directly into the United
    States.
        Senator McConnell. In fact, we are likely to end up having
    to take care of virtually the entire Kosovar population, once
    we get in there, given the stories the refugees are telling
    everyone about what is happening.
        Is it not your judgment that at the end of the day, we are
    probably going to be caring for, in one way or another,
    virtually everyone in Kosova?
        Mr. Atwood. At the end of the day, I hope we will be caring
    for them in Kosova, that we will engage along with our European
    allies and others, in the reconstruction effort in Kosova, and
    that the returnees themselves will play the largest role in
    reconstructing their own homes and cities and towns.
        Senator McConnell. Which leads me to the meeting with the
    President yesterday. The President was talking about the
    constructive relationship that he felt developed over the
    weekend with the front line countries that are being pressured
    by this war. And you alluded to the long-term relationship that
    we are going to have with that area.
        Is it not likely, Mr. Atwood, that we are going to have the
    kinds of relationships--maybe even with Kosova itself, if it
    becomes--it ends up being governed in a different way--a long-
    term relationship with Serbia, with Albania, with Macedonia,
    Romania, Bulgaria, in short that whole area, somewhat similar
    to the aftermath of the Camp David Accords, after which we had
    a sort of longstanding relationship with both Israel and Egypt?
    Is that not likely to be the direction in which we are headed?
        And I am wondering if you all have done at the Agency any
    kind of long-term planning about what kind of financial
    commitments we are going to be making in that area, which I am
    not suggesting I will oppose.
        I think we need to think ahead here. The foreign aid
    budget, as we both know, has been static to declining. It is
    not likely to expand.
        And clearly, we are looking here at a long-term commitment
    to an area where we have had not a huge commitment in the past.
        What kind of money are we talking about here? What
    percentage do you think will be carried by our European allies
    versus ourselves?
        In short, I would like for you to talk a little bit about
    what kind of long-term thinking and planning you are doing for
    what I think is going to be a long-term relationship here
    between the United States and these countries in the area.
        Mr. Atwood. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the things I
    did last week in traveling to Europe was to have a meeting with
    the five major NATO nations and European Union nations, Italy,
    Germany, France, Great Britain, and the United States, to talk
    about just that.
        We realize, of course, that we have to focus first and
    foremost on the reconstruction of Kosova and that we need to
    get our plans in place to do that. We have learned a lot from
    the reconstruction we had to do in Bosnia, so I think we will
    be able to move very swiftly with respect to planning for the
    return of refugees.
        But then we discussed, as was discussed at the NATO summit
    and discussed in Europe before the European nations came to the
    European Summit, what the Germans call a stability pact, what
    we have called a Southeastern Europe initiative, to try to draw
    the countries of that region more closely together so that what
    draws them together economically and through trade and the like
    will be stronger than what separates them, the ethnic
    prejudice, of course.
        It is an important aspect of the future here, but I can
    tell you that there is no disputing the fact that the Europeans
    will have to take the lead in doing this. They seem to want to.
        At the World Bank meetings that were held just the other
    day, it was decided that the planning for this would be chaired
    by the European Union and the World Bank.
        The United States clearly will play a role here. We are not
    looking to play even perhaps the same role in terms of the
    percentage of the whole that we played in Bosnia. But we are
    perhaps talking about 20 to 25 percent. We are talking
    obviously about using expertise.
        Senator McConnell. Of whatever size of the pie is we--about
    25 percent.
        Mr. Atwood. Whatever the size of the pie--that is right. We
    want the Europeans to take the lead. They seem willing to take
    the lead.
        I must say that, from the experience in Bosnia, if the
    United States is not involved in the early days, the startup
    time for the European Union takes too long. I am not blaming
    them for this. They obviously have a lot of things to work out
    when you have that many nations trying to work on something.
        It is a much slower startup time. And we can get in and
    involved, I think, in helping on the reconstruction a lot
    faster than they can.
        We have done a lot of this. We have done a lot of forward
    planning. I would be happy to submit some of the ideas that we
    have submitted to these other organizations to you, and we can
    make that part of the record for this hearing, if you would
    like.
        Senator McConnell. I have personally given a good deal of
    thought to that, and am interested in your thinking about it. I
    will want to look down the road to what lies ahead in terms of
    the impact of that on future foreign assistance budgets.
        Now, let me come back to the present for one other area,
    then I will pass the ball to Senator Lautenberg, and then on to
    Senator Campbell.
        The mixed to poor performance, so far, of UNHCR has, you
    know, gotten the attention of an awful lot of people including
    myself.
        I am wondering if--I gathered from your comments you think
    they are improving from the early days. But my inclination is
    to think we would be better off with this assistance package
    that we are putting together in the supplemental to focus on
    supporting the disaster assistance response team and the NGOs.
    I am curious as to your view of that.
        Mr. Atwood. Well, recognizing the weaknesses in the early
    days, I think that we have to understand first that the UNHCR
    is primarily responsible and has international legal authority
    to deal with refugees.
        They have standing to do it, vis-a-vis the sovereign
    governments. And we need to do everything we can to encourage
    them to play the role that they are legally authorized to play.
        Whenever a U.N. organization gets involved in this kind of
    a situation, we are very hesitant to be too publicly critical,
    because it is the old Pogo line, ``We have met the enemy, and
    he is us,'' to some extent.
        We need to beef them up. We need to make sure that they
    have both the resources and the people to do the job. And I
    think we have been working very, very assiduously to try to
    accomplish this.
        I have to give great credit to Assistant Secretary, Julia
    Taft. She has been in Geneva and, frankly, she has been banging
    on UNHCR--I guess that is the right way to put it--to make sure
    that they put their first team in the field. And I think that
    the visit of Gerald Walzer is the direct result of her efforts.
        Ms. Ogata is widely acclaimed as a very strong leader. But,
    at mid-ranks, many of the people that are the logisticians and
    the others that do these things have left the UNHCR in recent
    years.
        Their budget has been cut somewhat. We need to do what we
    can now as a part of the supplemental request that we have
    made, to really try to shore that operation up.
        I am pleased to see that Sergio de Mello, who is an
    outstanding former UNHCR person, has taken the lead on this as
    well.
        I think the U.N. system has been responding better on a
    day-to-day basis, and we need to do what we can to strengthen
    them and not to undercut them.
        Senator McConnell. Given the--what we now know based on
    reports from refugees of what has occurred in Kosova, I think
    it is a virtual certainty that we are going to have large
    numbers of refugees still in camps either in countries
    surrounding Kosova or in Kosova itself because homes have been
    destroyed, villages have been knocked down.
        We are going to have large numbers of refugees in those
    kinds of places in the winter. And I am thinking of putting
    into this supplemental a contingency fund to avoid having to go
    through the supplemental process again, hopefully, later in the
    year.
        I have not decided exactly how much, but I think it is a
    certainty that there are going to be either inside Kosova or in
    Albania, Macedonia, and other places in the area, large numbers
    of people still in refugee camps next winter.
        Do you think building a contingency fund might be a smart
    thing to do?
        Mr. Atwood. Mr. Chairman, normally when I come up here and
    testify, I have to defend the request of the administration.
    However, like you, I heard the President yesterday tell the
    leadership of the Congress that we want to be flexible. We
    want, obviously, to work with you in preparing this
    supplemental.
        I cannot argue with you. First of all, I would hope that we
    are not going to be talking about the need to winterize refugee
    camps or to do other preparations for winter.
        Senator McConnell. It is a certainty, is it not?
        Mr. Atwood. I do think your idea is a good one. I do not
    think it is a certainty, but I do think your idea is a good
    one.
        Senator McConnell. Well, you do not think it is a
    certainty. You think we can--can resettle this many people
    between now and next October?
        Mr. Atwood. I think if you thought it was a certainty, you
    would not call it a contingency fund. But I think it is a good
    phrase. [Laughter.]
        Senator McConnell. Well, I am not trying to put you on the
    spot. Let me just say it is a statement of the obvious that
    there are going to be large numbers of people still in refugee-
    type camps in the area, either in Kosova or in Macedonia or in
    Albania when the weather starts getting cold again. It is a
    certainty.
        And I think, you know, it--this supplemental obviously is
    largely devoted to the current emergency, but I think we need
    to look beyond that and be realistic.
        Now, what we are going to do here is take 5-minute question
    rounds. I see the chairman of the full committee is here.
        Do you, Mr. Chairman, want to say anything, or----
        Senator Stevens. Well, I am delighted to have a chance to
    be here, and I thank Mr. Atwood for his consideration the other
    day in postponing this testimony until now. And it is, I think,
    one of the significant portions of our supplemental.
        I will wait for my turn, however. Thank you.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator Lautenberg.

                opening statement of senator frank r. lautenberg

        Senator Lautenberg. Yes. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. I am going
    to try to be brief because our time got a little skewed by
    virtue of the vote.
        But I wanted to be here in particular to welcome
    Administrator Atwood for his excellent service to the
    Government.
        I remember it very well when you first took on this
    assignment. It probably to you, like to my own change in
    career, anticipated--the time has passed very quickly, but it
    has not passed without a lot of really good hard work.
        I want to commend you for it, and I would hope that if
    there is a successor--and that is assuming that perhaps we can
    send you on your way to Brazil. But if there is a successor, I
    hope he will continue--he or she, rather, will continue to try
    to make the reforms and the changes that you have made. It is a
    legacy that you should be very proud of; we are. And we wish
    you well in the future.
        I wanted to ask you this: I think the chairman was
    particularly astute in the kinds of questions he asked, because
    I think if we look at the facts, we see enormous problems in
    the future.
        Let it not be misunderstood, I am fully behind what the
    President and NATO is doing and I want them to continue
    vigorously, because we cannot tolerate the kind of ethnic
    oppression that we have seen there and the cruelty and the
    atrocities that accompany it.
        But if there is, hopefully, an outcome that can have the
    refugees returning to their communities in Kosova, has there
    been any kind of an estimate as to what it might cost to
    resettle these people?
        Mr. Atwood. The World Bank, I believe, has looked at this
    and has determined that, I am not sure that this is the final
    determination, but that the international cost would be about
    $3 billion. Obviously, part of that would be to try to start up
    an economy again, so that the economy itself could take a lot
    of the burden of reconstructing the country.
        Senator Lautenberg. You know, I have had a chance to visit
    the area. I was in last year. I was in Bosnia, Albania, Kosova,
    and Montenegro. And the condition of the surrounding states is
    a problem that existed far before the refugee groups started to
    swell and move to their--to those places.
        I think it is fair to say that we have a huge interest, an
    investment there that we have got to take care of. I think that
    if we succeed in getting restoration of the community places
    that were occupied by the Kosovars, we will have had said to
    the world at large in the 21st Century that this--that ethnic
    cleansing, this kind of oppression is not a standard by which
    you can measure your conduct. And I think that the response by
    NATO will have confirmed that.
        Anyone else who is ever thinking about it in the future
    will have to look at these pages in our history and say, ``We
    do not want to be subjected to them, and I wish you well.''
        My concerns are the ones that you expressed yourself, Mr.
    Atwood. I would hope that we will know better about what the
    needs are. But I am dismayed that the budget resolution--and I
    am the ranking member on the budget committee--cut function 150
    by 15 percent from where the President was. And I think we have
    to find some way to restore that.
        We have all kinds of concerns in this very important
    subcommittee, including the securing of our embassies,
    protecting our people who are serving this country in other
    places.
        So I would urge that we see if we can do something in the
    supplemental--though I do not want to--I do not want to muddy
    the waters there, because as it is, it looks like it is going
    to be a train to pull lots of others interests that should not
    be there.
        So, Mr. Chairman, we will just have to continue to do what
    I think you personally want to do in terms of functioning and
    particularly with USAID.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you.
        Mr. Atwood. Mr. Chairman, if I may just respond briefly to
    Senator Lautenberg.
        I want to thank him first for his very kind remarks, but I
    think I should reciprocate, because I think your public service
    has been wonderful and I know that, given your own success in
    the private sector that you did not really need to do this kind
    of a job, but you have also served very well.
        I know you are also leaving your position at the end of
    this term, but it will be a loss for the Senate. Thank you.
        Senator Lautenberg. Thank you very much.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator Lautenberg.
        Senator Campbell.

              opening statement of senator ben nighthorse campbell

        Senator Campbell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        On April 21, the U.N. raised the estimated number of
    refugees from 650,000 to about 950,000. I noticed in your
    notes, you said that something like 700,000 men, women, and
    children have been forced from their homes and crossed the
    borders into Albania, Macedonia, and Montenegro; and then also
    mentioned that estimates go as high as 800,000 or more.
        Does that mean that there may be that many still in Kosova
    in hiding, or in addition to the 700,000?
        Mr. Atwood. We think that 700,000 to 800,000 are in IDP
    status, internally displaced status at this point. Yes,
    Senator.
        Senator Campbell. Yes. And let me ask you something about
    Guantanamo Bay. I have never been totally clear on this.
        I understood the original plan was to resettle 20,000
    refugees at Guantanamo. But by housing them there, they would
    not have been eligible for asylum, and so that is why they are
    going to be housed in other places. Is that correct?
        Mr. Atwood. That is right, Senator. We made a decision. You
    know how the Government works.
        Senator Campbell. Yes.
        Mr. Atwood. When you consider moving refugees, it would
    have taken us a very long time to come up with a decision,
    frankly, because of legal considerations, the need to involve
    the Justice Department and the like, to actually take them to
    the United States.
        We needed a quick decision on this one, so that we could
    respond to the commitment we made to bring in 20,000 people and
    the expedient decision to break the deadlock in Macedonia was
    to say they would come to Guantanamo.
        Senator Campbell. I understand.
        Mr. Atwood. We have now been able to----
        Senator Campbell. Is Guantanamo going to be used for
    anything?
        Mr. Atwood. No, not at this juncture, Senator.
        Senator Campbell. You also mention we are going to
    encourage the return of the Kosovars to the extent we can. Do
    we have any projected estimate of what that will cost in
    addition to what this supplemental is going to provide?
        Mr. Atwood. We do not. And one of the reasons that we did
    not put this into the supplemental is because we would have had
    a hard time defending any particular number, not being able to
    get on to the ground in Kosova and assess the damage ourselves
    and come up with the number.
        As I had mentioned earlier, the World Bank sees this as
    possibly a $3 billion international commitment to try to get
    the economy of the autonomous or whatever status Kosova will
    have to----
        Senator Campbell. Over how long?
        Mr. Atwood. I am not even sure of that, Senator, at this
    point. They said $3 billion. When we did the Bosnia thing, they
    came up with a $5 billion package over 3 years.
        Bosnia was a lot larger. There were many other
    complications in Bosnia, so $3 billion may be a good ballpark
    figure for Kosova.
        Senator Campbell. And that--did I understand that the
    administration has said that we would try to supply 25 percent
    of that cost, or is that just a figure for----
        Mr. Atwood. I think we have used the figure 25 percent in
    support of our request for this supplemental. That is our
    normal contribution to UNHCR and an effort to provide for
    humanitarian relief.
        I am not sure that we have decided what percentage we would
    come up with respect to the reconstruction of Kosova, but that
    is probably about right.
        Senator Campbell. Well, it is a pretty good--probably,
    pretty high probability that this will not be the last request.
        Mr. Atwood. This is an emergency request. We have tried to
    keep it restricted to what we need now and through the end of
    this fiscal year, so you are right.
        Senator Campbell. OK.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no further questions.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator Campbell.
        Senator Mikulski.

                opening statement of senator barbara a. mikulski

        Senator Mikulski. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Well, I, too, really want to thank you, Mr. Atwood, for
    your service at AID and wish you well, and know that I am sure
    that you did not think that the last months at AID would be
    filled with such deep and extensive and melancholy
    responsibility.
        Mr. Atwood, we have had extensive military briefings on a
    frequent basis--they have been detailed; they have been
    specific; and they have been very helpful--so that we could
    kind of get a picture of what was needed in terms of our
    emergency military supplemental.
        But I must say, I do not think that the administration has
    organized the same type of extensive briefing on the refugees.
    What I keep seeing on TV is the flow of the refugees into our
    own--into front line states or being trapped in Kosova. And all
    we see are the horrendous melancholy situation. And there is no
    picture other than the most heart-breaking and chaotic
    situation.
        So I do not have it. I really do not. I have numbers here.
    I have statistics here. I have the pictures here, but I really
    do not have a picture of what people are doing.
        Now, I visited--I have not had the opportunity yet to go to
    this area, which I hope to in the future. But I did visit it by
    proxy by going to the Catholic Relief Organization, whose
    international headquarters is in Baltimore, to meet with staff
    who had just come back to be able to telephone to key staff
    right into the camps. And actually they are giving you and
    other AID and our U.S. military helping them very high marks.
    But we do not have a picture.
        Second, when we talk about it, we have one state,
    Macedonia, that is ready to explode. We have another front line
    state, Albania, that is ready to implode because of the chaos.
    And we are in for a very long haul as Chairman McConnell has
    indicated.
        If peace breaks out, there is the funding for the
    resettlement. If peace does not break out in the way--a time
    table we would all hope, we have the situation that we are now
    confronting and even a magnitude that could grow.
        I believe the American people will support us. Look at the
    45,000 people that called the FEMA hotline, so that they could
    give to a proper relief organization. And we know that.
        But we need to have a picture, so that we can really talk
    about how we need to help you do your job and help others be
    able to do what these gallant NGOs, not only Catholic Relief,
    but working in Kosova like the International Orthodox Christian
    charities that are actually in Kosova and in the area doing
    help.
        So I am going to give you the chance to paint a picture in
    my question, because I hear $150 million for this and so on.
    Anyway, I think we need a briefing. I think we need the same
    kind of briefing on refugees that we get on the military.
        Right now, I know more about what oil tanks that we have
    taken out than what refugees have been taken in and where they
    have been placed.
        This is not a blame conversation, but we really need it.
    And a lot of our colleagues, I think, would like--would welcome
    this as well.
        Having then said that, let me get to my specific question,
    which is: Tell us, really, with the displaced people--and they
    do not like to be--the organization said, ``Please refer to
    them as deportees.''
        The deportees--could you tell us then, what is the
    condition in the camps in Macedonia? Could you paint a picture
    of this condition and how we are responding? What are the NGOs
    doing? Is it as chaotic as we think and how is our U.S.
    military and other NATO military helping out? And what does it
    cost to do this?
        Mr. Atwood. Thank you, Senator. I have come up here with
    Secretary Cohen and Secretary Albright and General Shelton and
    others, and there is obviously a lot of interest in the
    military campaign, because this may be the ultimate answer to
    the refugee problem. If this succeeds, we will be able to get
    beyond this.
        But often they will talk about the problem. And it has been
    a problem. I think it has been worked out very well; working
    with 19 other NATO nations on command and control decisions and
    targeting and the like. I think they have done a very good job
    of sorting that out.
        Put that on one side. And then think about the problem that
    we face on the refugee side. We are not only working with not
    just 19 nations, but a lot of other nations who are trying to
    respond to this.
        We are working with UNHCR. We are working with two
    governments that are under tremendous pressures for different
    reasons. And we are working with a large number of NGOs who are
    absolutely, as you suggest, essential to getting this job done.
        I mentioned the other day in the hearing that CRS--and I
    saw Ken Hackett, the head of it yesterday--is really stretched
    thin. They have got people all over the world who they have had
    to pull into Kosova in order to handle this crisis. And so they
    clearly are a part of this effort.
        But you do not get military discipline when you are talking
    about humanitarian organizations. You get people who are always
    talking to the press about all the problems. They should. I
    would not want to stop them from saying, for example, as
    someone was quoted the other day as saying, ``This camp is on
    the verge of a riot.''
        I am not sure based on my reports from my DART team that
    that was accurate, but people in the NGO community are trying
    to get the world's attention. We need help. We need support.
    These people should not be kept in an uncomfortable state for
    one more day.
        Our key task right now is in saving lives and making sure
    that health problems do not overwhelm us, and making sure that
    we can somehow alleviate the crowding of these camps.
        In Macedonia, the situation is getting acute, because we
    have had in the last 2 days 12,000 people come across the
    border.
        Now, they have built a camp at this Blace border crossing
    for 2,500 people in transit. That has been overwhelmed, but
    frankly it is a lot better situation than we had in the early
    days when people were left out in a field for several nights.
        They are now building a new camp in Macedonia, and 5,000
    people are going to be pushed into that camp. Pushed, that
    sounds like an involuntary way of doing it. They undoubtedly
    will welcome going into a new camp, because these conditions in
    Stankovic camp are really not appropriate right now.
        So this is the picture. I mentioned earlier before you are
    going to have people saying that we are on the verge of crisis
    every day in the next weeks, because we still have maybe as
    many as 600,000 or 700,000 people that are going to come out.
    Right now, if they all came out all at once, we could not
    handle it.
        Senator Mikulski. Are we able to feed the refugees? Are we
    able to provide facilities for them? Are we able to provide
    health care? See, you are making my point.
        Mr. Atwood. Right.
        Senator Mikulski. What I am reading is about chaos. I would
    love to have a map right here that showed ``Here is this camp,
    and here is the response, and this is the condition,'' and, you
    know, ``We are either running short of blankets,'' or ``We have
    enough blankets.''
        Mr. Atwood. The good news is that we can provide enough
    food. The bad news is that people have to stand in long lines
    for that food.
        The good news is that we have medical care and doctors
    sufficient to the task. We are inoculating kids against the
    measles possibility, and for polio. So we have, I think, people
    in place to save lives.
        This is not going to mean the same as saying that they are
    living a comfortable life.
        My fear, as the chairman indicated earlier as well, is that
    as the summer months come on, it is going to get oppressively
    hot in this region, particularly in the Macedonia camps. We
    need to make provision for that as well.
        We are not there. And I said a few weeks ago that I would
    hope to say in a few weeks that we have stabilized the
    situation. We have not stabilized the situation yet. And if we
    keep seeing this outflow, we are going to see a constant
    crisis.
        I do think the good news is that the World Food Program has
    performed very, very well, and that there are food pipelines
    now that are up to 2 weeks for whatever. We are preparing for
    the worst, which is that we could have a refugee population of
    1.5 million people.
        Senator Mikulski. So--it is essentially--it is a whole
    regional and ethnic population?
        Mr. Atwood. It could be an absolute ethnic cleansing in the
    end. That is right. And that would mean a doubling of the
    population that we are now handling.
        Senator Mikulski. Mr. Chairman, I am mindful of time, so
    please alert me when you feel I have extended--because I did
    not know if you were using----
        Senator McConnell. Yes. I am--I do not know why this has
    not clicked. I think you have been----
        Senator Mikulski. OK.
        Senator McConnell. OK.
        Senator Mikulski. If I--just one question: What is our
    military doing, for example, in Albania to create the
    infrastructure to deliver supplies? And that will be my last
    question.
        Mr. Atwood. We are in the process now of----
        Senator Mikulski. And what is the cost of that?
        Mr. Atwood. They are in the process now of building a camp
    to service about 20,000 people. We have finally located a site
    for that, and they are doing that for us.
        There are resources in the supplemental on the military
    side for humanitarian operations as well. I believe, about $335
    million.
        Senator Mikulski. But are they building roads, or are they
    building a new airport? What are they doing?
        Mr. Atwood. They are performing magnificently. The airport
    in Tirana, which is receiving all of the humanitarian goods, is
    basically being run by the U.S. military. The air traffic
    control system has been set up by the U.S. military.
        They are going to be improving the facilities at the port
    of Durres, the only port that is available for us. And,
    increasingly, humanitarian goods are being shipped across from
    Italy by ship. We need them obviously for that purpose.
        They are going to repair the road to Kukes, which is so
    dangerous, and people have talked about it.
        We are getting tremendous support from the U.S. military
    and from NATO, and we would not be able to do this without
    them.
        Senator Mikulski. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator Mikulski.
        Senator Bennett.

                 opening statement of senator robert f. bennett

        Senator Bennett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Atwood, as I listened to Senator Mikulski, I find
    myself very sympathetic. Trying to get a picture of what is
    happening here--the chairman says we are in this for the long
    haul. I have no idea how long that long haul is going to be,
    but I think it is going to be longer rather than shorter.
        And let me just share a few random observations with you
    that have come to me, and then underscore why we need the kind
    of big picture briefing that Senator Mikulski talks about.
        The numbers that you have outlined, of course, we all know,
    the number of people that have been driven out of Kosova in the
    various camps. We are talking about bringing 20,000 of them to
    the United States. That is less than 10 percent of this first
    group.
        I am told there are 145,000 refugees left over from the
    ethnic cleansing that took place in Bosnia. Only for some
    reason, we do not get concerned about those, because those were
    Serbs that were driven from their homes by Croatian troops.
        Where are they? Are they in camps somewhere? Are--their
    children probably have the same need for medical supply and
    food as the Kosovar children do. That is part of the big
    picture.
        I sat through briefings yesterday with General Shelton. He
    is doing what he has to do militarily, but the net effect of
    what he is doing and what NATO is doing is to destroy
    systematically the economy of Serbia or Yugoslavia.
        And out of that destruction will come more refugees. Again,
    they will not be Kosovars. They may not have been driven from
    their homes by Milosevic's brutal police, but they will be
    driven from their jobs. They will be driven into desperation by
    NATO's systematic destruction of their economy.
        The Albanians are saying that the responsibility for these
    refugees is ours because we did it. That is, they believe
    Milosevic's propaganda, that people have been pleading--fleeing
    Kosova because of the bombing and not because of Milosevic.
        Now, that is grotesque, but it is part of the big picture
    here that we have refugees in a place that is blaming America
    for the existence of the refugees. And that is not a conducive
    kind of atmosphere into which the--in which one mounts a
    humanitarian effort.
        The thing gets worse and worse every day. And I would hope
    somewhere somebody who has the facts that I do not have is
    sitting back and trying to get this big picture that Senator
    Mikulski talks about, because ultimately this committee is
    going to have to make some very hard choices.
        Are we going to say ``We are going to embrace this entire
    problem and deal with all of these refugees''? Are we going to
    swallow hard and say what we did in Rwanda, which is
    effectively ``We really cannot do anything for you,'' and see
    some people starve?
        Are we going to decide that the people we are going to let
    starve are the Serbs, and that the people we are going to fix--
    try to fix are the Kosovars, or are we going to say, ``Well,
    let's take 50/50 of each,'' or--or whatever?
        These are very, very difficult questions. They are not
    Republican questions or Democratic questions or Conservative
    questions or Liberal questions.
        If we are going into this area with the humanitarian
    impulses that Americans have always had, I do not want to go
    into it piecemeal. I want to have some kind of overall picture
    as to just how bad this is and how manageable the challenge
    will be and where America is going to go.
        Now, I know you cannot do that in response to a question
    here. I am just underscoring the need for the kind of
    comprehensive briefing--this briefing that Senator Mikulski
    called for, because if we are going to have to break caps from
    the budget committee, if we are going to have to have billions
    and billions of dollars not contemplated when the budget was
    drawn up, that is going to channel through this committee, we
    should not do it with a Band-Aid here and a Band-Aid there. We
    should step back and look at the whole thing. So I just
    underscore that statement by Senator Mikulski.
        Now, let me ask you a few quick questions about the
    refugees coming here. Will they be eligible to bring their
    immediate families with them? And if so, how many people
    ultimately will this 20,000 turn out to be in terms of the
    number coming to the United States?
        Mr. Atwood. The number, Senator, we are committed to bring
    is 20,000. And we do not want to see families separated. The
    idea of this program is to reunify families. They presumably
    will have family members here. And we certainly are not going
    to separate families.
        We are not going to exceed the number of 20,000 at this
    juncture, but we feel we can bring families together here and
    meet those requirements.
        Senator Bennett. So that is the criteria, to be one of the
    20,000, is that you have to have a----
        Mr. Atwood. Right.
        Senator Bennett [continuing]. Family member already in the
    United States?
        Mr. Atwood. That is right, or you have to be a, what is
    called in the law, a vulnerable case. Meaning that you have a
    serious health problem that can be treated here in the United
    States.
        Senator Bennett. Now, when do you estimate they might
    return?
        Mr. Atwood. We estimate that--we cannot estimate when the
    war will be over.
        Senator Bennett. Yes.
        Mr. Atwood. But that is when we expect most of them to
    return. They have certain rights when they get here to apply
    for permanent status, but we expect and will encourage them to
    return, and we will provide resources so they can return.
        Senator Bennett. Well, all right.
        Thank you very much.
        Senator McConnell. The the answer to that is never.
        Senator Bennett. That is my instinct as well and----
        Senator McConnell. These are the 20,000 of the luckiest
    refugees, I think it is safe to say.
        Senator Bennett. That is right.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Leahy.

                      prepared statement of senator leahy

        Senator Leahy. Well, Mr. Chairman, I will put my statement
    on the record.
        Senator McConnell. OK.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Senator Patrick J. Leahy
        We are fortunate to have Brian Atwood here to discuss USAID's
    budget request for fiscal year 2000. Brian has been a strong advocate
    for USAID, for fighting poverty, for United States leadership in
    solving global problems that threaten our economy and our security.
        By now I think we all recognize that our way of life depends on
    what happens in the world around us. Infectious diseases do not pay
    attention to national borders. A person infected with HIV or measles in
    Asia can be in Los Angeles in 12 hours.
        Poverty and violence impede the development of markets for U.S.
    exports, and create economic and political refugees who end up here.
        These problems pose far greater challenges to Americans than ever
    before, yet many Members of Congress want to cut foreign aid. Why is
    that? The only explanation is that the public continues to mistakenly
    believe that 15 cents of each Federal dollar is spent on foreign aid,
    when in fact we spend only one penny. It is terribly short-sighted.
        USAID has had to cut programs that it makes no sense to cut. Take
    one example--protecting biodiversity. We are spending far less than a
    few years ago, yet the pressures on the environment are rising
    steadily. Agriculture, energy conservation, family planning. We are
    doing less, not more.
        In health, we are doing more, but not nearly enough. The number of
    people infected with HIV has increased by 15 percent per year. By the
    year 2000 it will reach 40 million. 12 million children have already
    lost at least one parent to AIDS.
        We know how to limit the spread of AIDS, but our funding has
    remained stagnant for years. We are about to approve at least $6
    billion in emergency spending for Kosova. AIDS is an emergency. It is a
    catastrophe. We should treat it like one.
        Members on both sides of this subcommittee have urged us to provide
    $60 million to combat tuberculosis. That is five times what AID
    currently spends. We should do it, but where would the money come from?
    We don't have it.
        The same thing goes for our export promotion programs. With more
    money we could support a lot more exports of American small businesses,
    but we do not have it.
        Brian, you are coming to the end of your tenure at AID. I want to
    thank you for taking an agency that was on its death bed and giving it
    a future.
        A lot has been done but we have more to do. The contracting process
    is still agonizingly slow. Your written testimony says you plan to lay
    off more AID staff. I know the budget difficulties you face, but I want
    to discuss this further with you.
        Mr. Chairman, you have fought for this budget and I and everyone
    here thank you for it. But it seems as if each year our job gets
    harder.

                             policy based on polls

        Senator Leahy. I am glad to see Administrator Atwood here.
    I have been a fan and supporter of his, and I am pleased he is
    here.
        Let me follow up a bit further on what Senator Bennett has
    said, because I have some of the same concerns.
        We have a situation at which, at least in the initial part,
    not the part that involved you, but I worry that our policy, in
    the former Yugoslavia was not based on a plan. It was based on
    polls.
        If the polls say, ``Ground troops are not favorable,'' then
    we say we are not going to use ground troops.
        People--historians can debate whether that encouraged
    Milosevic to move forward or whether, as some would say, he had
    his troops prepared to do that in any event.
        But I think now that we are into it, no matter what the
    polls are, we better have policy by planning. Is it fair to
    say, for example, the entire population of Kosova, roughly 1.5
    million people are going to end up as refugees? And if so, are
    we budgeting for that?
        The goal is to get them back to Kosova. We did the same in
    Bosnia. How do they go back? Their property has been looted,
    their homes destroyed. Family members summarily executed,
    raped, tortured by people they may have to live near if they go
    back. I think we have to prepare for many of these refugees not
    going back.
        The supplemental is for 6 months. That is going to take us
    to October and Senator McConnell has already said that is not
    enough. I agree with him completely on that.
        What happens when winter comes? Do they have to stay there,
    or if they do not go home for winter, which they will not, what
    does it cost to carry them through the winter?
        I mean they have--whether we like it or not, they have
    become ours and NATO's problem. And we are going to be
    providing most of the air power for NATO, but at this point we
    are all in this together for these refugees.
        You have children who are going to die with dysentery,
    other diseases that adults may survive even in their weakened
    condition, but the children will not. They are not getting
    adequate nutrition in a number of areas, so these children
    again are going to be stunted for the rest of their lives as a
    results of that.
        So do we have enough? Are we planning for them to stay
    through next winter?
        Mr. Atwood. Senator, I am glad you asked the question,
    because it gives me an opportunity also to address Senator
    Bennett's point, which I think is a very valid point.
        We have been trying from the very beginning here to do a
    lot of things. One of the things we have been trying to do is
    to keep a bipartisan coalition in support of the efforts, not
    just the war efforts, but the efforts to try to deal with the
    refugees. And I think we have succeeded.
        One of the issues that I do not really want to get into
    very deeply here, but because I think I would rather have Jack
    Lew take on this, is sort of budget politics up here. We are
    submitting an emergency supplemental----
        Senator McConnell. I have asked Jack Lew some of these same
    questions, I want you to know.
        Mr. Atwood. We did not want to endanger the bipartisan
    consensus by going beyond, you know, an emergency supplemental
    and adding a lot of resources for the reconstruction of Kosova
    and for other things that we did not think were legitimate
    emergencies. So that is a part of it.
        With respect to the policy, part of the policy has been to
    try to get as unified a NATO as possible. And obviously,
    Milosevic has helped us a great deal in that regard in the way
    he has treated people in Kosova.
        We now have a very strongly unified NATO, and that relates
    to the issue of ground forces and the like.
        We also wanted to keep Russia in the game here. And I think
    that ground forces at this juncture would really alienate our
    friends in Russia who want to help in the diplomatic exercise
    that we are engaged in here.
        So there are a lot of factors that do not relate to taking
    polls that are being considered here as we proceed down this
    path. We clearly----
        Senator Leahy. I am not suggesting a vague idea. I am
    talking about some of the things that we are going to see here
    in the first place.
        Mr. Atwood. I understand, Senator.
        With respect to the requests we have made here and our
    anticipation of the contingency that we would have to find
    winterized facilities, we are already engaged in looking for
    places where people could go in the winter.
        We have got a number of large warehouse-type buildings
    where we might be able to use for a winterized situation if
    that contingency arises. But I want to make it clear that we
    have based our emergency request on the notion that we are not
    the only nation that is responding to the humanitarian crisis.
    The Europeans are doing a good job so far.
        Senator Leahy. But are we basing it on the propability that
    we could be there at this time next year in the same
    situation----
        Mr. Atwood. We are basing it----
        Senator Leahy [continuing]. If not even more refugees than
    we have now?
        Mr. Atwood. We are basing it on the worst case possibility
    that we may, as an international community, have to handle 1.5
    million refugees and that they may all come out before the end
    of the fiscal year. But we are basing it also on the notion
    that our contribution will be in the 25-percent range.
        Senator Leahy. No. My point is: Is the 25 percent based on
    the fact that they may all come out and may all be there next
    year at this time, not back in Kosova, but still in refugee
    camps?
        Mr. Atwood. Senator, no. We are basing it on the notion
    that we may have a worst case and we are trying to get through,
    both on the military side of this request, through the end of
    this fiscal year.
        If we get to that point, and we are still faced with the
    prospect that they will be there next year, we clearly will
    have to ask for another supplemental.
        Senator McConnell. Could I just interject on that point,
    Pat?
        Senator Leahy. Sure.
        Senator McConnell. Before you got here, I said one of the
    things that we ought to give some thought to and I want to talk
    to you about, but have not actually yet, is putting in a
    contingency fund. There is no question this is an inadequate
    request.
        Senator Leahy. Yes. They are not going to go back this
    fall. I mean, that is----
        Senator McConnell. Yes. This is an inadequate request.
    There is nothing in the 2000 budget that will accommodate this.
    We have a serious funding problem here.
        Senator Leahy. Which I will work with you on, because I
    cannot believe that they are going to be out of there.
        I mean, I have a normally optimistic nature. It is part of
    my Italian side, but I cannot believe that they are going to be
    out of there, and I cannot believe it gets anything but worse
    as we go on.
        I have a number of questions for the record. I know my time
    is up, Mr. Chairman, but if I might ask one question, though.
        As a parent and as a husband, I cannot imagine anything
    that would tear more than not knowing where my children are or
    where my spouse is if you have been displaced like this.
        We are looking at hundreds of parents who have reported
    lost children. Some of these children are too young to even
    speak. There are hundreds or thousands of family members that
    have lost contact with each other.
        I have been talking with a number of technology companies.
    I know you have, too. They have offered to donate computer
    equipment and digital cameras to speed this up.
        I talked to USIA about this. I know they work with UNHCR,
    the ICRC and IOM. Is this something that AID is involved in,
    too? We have some companies that are willing to donate
    equipment. Some we may have to buy.
        But at least to the extent we can to get a digital record--
    if you have unaccompanied children in a camp, to be able to
    take digital photographs and be able to give people in other
    camps access to this and at least look at the pictures and
    maybe find out where their families are; or people who have got
    family names to be able to put them in and photographs, and see
    where they are.
        Mr. Atwood. Senator, we are deeply involved in it. We want
    people to make donations of cellular phones. And the USIA is
    working on an Internet system that we can put in the camps.
        And we are going to be funding Radio 21, which was the
    Kosovar radio station out of Pristina, so that they can have
    constant broadcasts to the camps. We would like donations of
    radios, transistor radios, so that people can listen to Radio
    21.
        They will be putting on lists of people who are missing. I
    do not think that anyone who just reads about this can grasp
    the emotion.
        I stood there in Tirane at the refugee camp, talked to a
    woman who is missing her 21-year-old daughter. And the tears
    started to flow and I will tell you, it is a gut wrenching
    experience to just talk to them in person about missing people
    in their own family.
        I had more hope for her than I have for many. If she were
    missing a 21-year-old son, he may be already buried in a grave
    in Kosova, unfortunately.
        Senator Leahy. Thank you.
        Senator McConnell. Yes. Thank you.
        Senator Leahy. I will work with you on that.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you.
        Senator Mikulski. Mr. Chairman, can I just support your
    concept of a contingency plan? Because even if peace broke out
    in the next six weeks or four weeks, and even if the people
    went back to Kosova, they would have to one, rebuild. There is
    no time to plant. Even if things work well, the time frame----
        Senator McConnell. Yes. I would say, Senator Mikulski,
    before you----
        Senator Leahy. And this is not easy country.
        Senator McConnell. Before you got here right at the
    beginning of the hearing, I was saying to Mr. Atwood that I
    think we are looking at a long-term relationship with this
    whole area, the front-line states that have been severely
    pressured by all this activity, Kosova, maybe even Serbia with
    a different democratically elected government.
        The net result of all of this is a long-term relationship,
    which could be similar to the relationship in the Middle East
    in the aftermath of the Camp David Accords; the big difference
    being that--at least I gather the discussions are that the U.S.
    participation is anticipated to be about 25 percent of the
    whole, whatever the whole is.
        But that could be a pretty big 25 percent, which will
    require us to completely rearrange how we have done the foreign
    assistance bill in recent years.
        And we are going to have to do that as soon as fiscal 2000,
    this next fiscal year, which means, Brian, that we need some
    more help, as everybody has pointed out, in looking forward.
        And I know that there is a way to get some kind of
    additional information. I do not know why we cannot get a camp-
    by-camp breakdown of blankets, tents, food and medicine,
    compare it with the number of refugees. We ought to be able to
    get some of these statistics.
        I think we are probably going to have to have additional
    hearings on this.
        Finally, I want to ask a couple more questions.
        Oh, I see the chairman did come back. I am going to defer
    to him and let him get his round in.
        Senator Stevens. Thank you very much. I am in another
    meeting down the hall there and I am sorry to be running back
    and forth, Mr. Atwood.
        Mr. Atwood. Yes, sir.

                    opening statement of senator ted stevens

        Senator Stevens. Let me say that you are on the 2000 bill
    also, right? I have a couple of questions on that.
        Some Alaskans have contacted me about the efforts to
    rebuild schools in Central America. This group is called
    Schools for the World's Children, and they rebuild schools, and
    they particularly want to rebuild schools that were destroyed
    in Hurricane George.
        They equip them and train the teachers, and they have a
    particular amount they spend per school. I think it is about
    $50,000 per school.
        They are working on four schools now over the next two
    years for Honduras. They have surveyed the sites, but say that
    they are having trouble finding out who they should work with
    in your agency regarding the relief efforts.
        They offer time, talent and their own money. Could you, if
    you do not know precisely now, let my office know what agency
    they can work with?
        They feel that they do not have anyone to work with, and I
    think they are reputable people ready to go and help. Is there
    a person in your agency who deals with this type of people? Do
    you welcome assistance from people like these?
        Mr. Atwood. We certainly do, Mr. Chairman, people like that
    are vital to our efforts in Central America, so they can
    contact me directly or they can contact our Assistant
    Administrator for Latin America, Mark Schneider, who used to
    work up here on the Hill. You may remember him.
        But we would be happy to talk to them. And, our hope is, of
    course, that we will see the Central American supplemental
    perhaps riding along with the Kosova supplemental so that we
    will have the resources to finance these good works.
        Senator Stevens. The second question is about our
    relationship with the Russian Far East. I hope you know that we
    feel very close in Alaska to the people over there.
        Our people go over there on their own and they are trying
    to assist very much. There is a staggering problem in the
    Russian Far East with regard to orphanages in particular. They
    have quite a few of them. I visited one. I am told that they
    are short on almost everything including fuel. The homes are
    kept at about 45 degrees, when they do have fuel.
        And I hate to put it this way, and don't mean to offend
    anybody, but we feel they are sort of forgotten as far as
    Moscow is concerned, the way we were for so long when we were a
    territory.
        We have a great deal of empathy for them. We have adopted
    hundreds of their children to bring over to Alaska's family,
    just--not fully adopted. But, we have taken them into our
    homes. Last year, we provided funds to help these Russian
    orphanages. Senator McConnell helped us on that.
        As a matter of fact, it is through his leadership, that was
    accomplished. But they tell us that the aid has not been
    distributed. Can you tell me why it has not been distributed?
        Mr. Atwood. I do not know specifically what you are
    referring to, but I certainly will get you an answer. I know
    that we have obligated over $30 million for a wide variety of
    projects in the Russian Far East for enterprise development,
    for environment, health and various partnerships.
        It sounds like this is one of those partnerships. I think
    that we have had an opportunity, some of our people, to meet
    with you on this.
        I know that our previous Assistant Administrator, Tom Dine,
    actually visited Alaska and has spoken to several officials
    there.
        Senator Stevens. Yes, he has, but we have not seen any of
    that come to fruition. Our people are still going over on a
    weekly basis. And they do not see much in the way of assistance
    coming in there.
        Mr. Atwood. Well----
        Senator Stevens. Those are places that people forget. Did
    you know, that when I am home, I am closer to Japan than I am
    to Washington DC.
        Mr. Atwood. Right.
        Senator Stevens. We are a long way away, and they are a
    long way away from their national government. But we see them,
    and they are not getting much help.
        I do not know why we spend so much money west of the Urals,
    when the real tragedies are east of the Urals in Russia. But we
    seem to do that and just ignore a vast, vast area of people out
    there, who are more inclined towards us and our society and our
    way of life than Moscow's.
        Mr. Atwood. Well, we agree with you, Senator. As I say, we
    have obligated $30 million. I will look into this personally
    because, frankly, it is not only a worthwhile thing to do, but
    if we are not pleasing the chairman of the Appropriations
    Committee, I think we should look at this very seriously.
        Senator Stevens. Well, I will be pleased to go over there
    with you sometime.
        Mr. Atwood. Good.
        Senator Stevens. I would love to take the committee over
    and really see what living in Eastern Russia is like. Most of
    the members of the committee have been to Moscow, but I do not
    think many of them have been to the Russian Far East.
        I was able to go to Kosova, with a series of the Members of
    the House and Senate. One of the things that impressed us was
    the problem of food. I am being provincial to a great extent
    now. We have the food of the type that they can use in camps
    where they do not--people do not want to cook it.
        One of the interesting things was they have cold meals.
    They do not want fires in every one of those tents, and I
    understand that. But our salmon is pre-cooked. You can eat it
    right out of the can. And we do. A lot of people do not like
    that, but you--we have pouch salmon now, and some of it is in
    larger sizes.
        When I saw what they are handing out there, the first thing
    that struck my mind was: Why don't they distribute something
    that does not require cooking, someting that is precooked,
    rather than some of the things that they were giving out?
        They were giving out bread and some kind of boxed meals.
    But the meats that they were giving out were not the type that
    were easily preserved without refrigeration.
        Canned fish does stay preserved and with the pouches now,
    it is easy to handle. I do not know why the relief efforts do
    not turn to something that is extremely edible, particularly
    with what else they were handing out.
        I would hope that you would take a look at this issue.
    There is fish on the East Coast. There is fish also on the West
    Coast. But there seems to be a lack of interest as far as our
    relief agencies are concerned in this type of food.
        A very small amount of it has as much protein as a large
    amount of some of the other kinds of meats that are being
    distributed. And I would urge you to take a look at it.
        Mr. Atwood. Yes, sir.
        Senator Stevens. When we went through the line was three-
    quarters-of-a-mile long.
        Mr. Atwood. Yes.
        Senator Stevens. I went along with some of them when they
    got their rations. It was one meal for the whole day. That food
    has got to have real sustenance in it to keep people and,
    particularly young kids fed. They had six kids per family in
    that camp we saw.
        Mr. Atwood. Yes.
        Senator Stevens. That is an enormous number of people to
    feed. Our State stands ready to offer assistance and to help
    finance efforts to get you some of that fish into that area if
    you would like to have it.
        Mr. Atwood. Thank you, Senator. I want to give you one
    piece of good news. The lines are shorter, because we are now
    issuing ration cards to a single family. They can pick up the
    food for the whole family. I do not know why they did not do
    that at the outset, but----
        Senator Stevens. I do not know either, because there was
    distress there. Mothers with babies that were nursing had to
    stand in line for 4 hours in order to get their food.
        Mr. Atwood. Yes.
        Senator Stevens. The fathers in that group were very upset.
    I know it is a matter of organization. You had 38,000 people in
    that one camp with one food line.
        Mr. Atwood. Right.
        Senator Stevens. That did not seem very smart. [Laughter.]
        Mr. Atwood. Well, as each day goes by, we get smarter,
    Senator, I think. I think that is the answer to your question.
    It is hard to--on the other hand, I have to say this for the
    people that are running the camp, when I saw the same camp you
    saw a few days later, I said to myself, if I had to organize a
    whole town of 25,000 or 28,000 people in 3 weeks time--they
    have done quite a job of doing it. I mean----
        Senator Stevens. Well, the camp was well laid out and they
    were happy people, except for standing in line.
        Mr. Atwood. Yes. Absolutely.
        Senator Stevens. And they let us know about that.
    [Laughter.]
        Mr. Atwood. Yes, they let me know about it, too, sir.
        Senator Stevens. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        You requested $25 million for police training. I am
    assuming--or should I assume that that includes the
    Macedonians?
        And I also want to ask you since one of my great
    frustrations from the beginning is our unwillingness to arm and
    train the KLA--we know the only good thing that is happening on
    the ground inside Kosova is the KLA is gaining in numbers and
    strength. And we cooperate with them in every way, except we
    will not arm and train them.
        Do you anticipate the KLA participating in some kind of
    police training as well? In other words, what are you going to
    do with the $25 million? Let me just put it that way.
        Mr. Atwood. The $25 million is designed to train the
    refugees so that we can stand up a police force in Kosova as
    they return, rather than this waiting as we did in Bosnia.
        Senator McConnell. All right. Well, who are these people
    going to be?
        Mr. Atwood. Well, we are going to have to think about how
    we identify those people. Clearly, they should be leaders of
    the community and people who are willing to volunteer to do
    police work, but that, I think, has not been sorted out, but
    they will be refugees for the most part.
        They will get, I think, 5 weeks of training outside the
    camps, probably in Italy or some other location, and then they
    will get additional training as well. So we hope that they can
    perform some role within the camps, and then be ready to go
    back as a police force at that time.
        Senator McConnell. Well, I am pleased that you are
    shortening the wait in the lines by having one family member
    stand there instead of all of them. But it does certainly lead
    to the question of what else is going on in the camps other
    than waiting for food?
        Has any thought been given to providing some educational
    opportunity for the children? Is anybody involved in social
    services for these folks? Is that underway? What is happening
    on the side of----
        Mr. Atwood. That is part of the planning process. The
    Kosovars have been very, very clever over the years. For the
    last 15 years when they lost their autonomy, they have refused
    to go to Serb-run schools and Yugoslav-run schools, and so they
    have had a more or less of a clandestine educational effort
    underway.
        We think, therefore, we can work with them to try to make
    sure that their children are educated. We have got some
    contracts out so that education can be provided as part of
    this. So that is a very important part of what we are trying to
    do, Senator.
        Senator McConnell. Well, I think it is pretty clear that
    this is going to be a long-term commitment, and we may well
    need to have you and others up before the committee more often
    in the next few months to try to figure out where we go from
    here.
        There is not any question that we are going to have to
    restructure the 2000 regular allocation for this subcommittee
    to accommodate what is coming.
        And we may well decide to put in a contingency fund that
    you did not ask for in this supplemental because there is not
    any question that you are going to have to come back and I do
    not know what--you know, whether we will have the--the time or
    the inclination to do another supplemental this year.
        But in any event, we have got a lot to learn here. I want
    to thank you for giving us what you had, but I think you
    certainly share my view that we need to get a lot more as
    quickly as you can get it, so we can engage in some serious
    long-term planning not only for the immediate future--that is,
    the 2000 regular budget--but beyond that, because it looks to
    me like we are going to be in the area for a long time to come.
        Mr. Atwood. Mr. Chairman, you have always been an advocate
    of more resources for the 150 international affairs account. I
    think that has been very wise of you. We are really strained.
        I have rarely come before you when I have been offered more
    money. And what I am telling you now, very advisedly, is that
    we want to work with you on this. That is what I am authorized
    to say and I think that your idea is a good one. I hope we can
    pursue it.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Atwood. Thank you.

                         Additional committee questions

        Senator McConnell. There will be some additional questions
    which will be submitted for your response in the record.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Agency for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick J. Leahy
                        infectious disease surveillance
        Question. The GAO is doing a report, requested by myself and
    Senator McConnell, on barriers to the development of vaccines for use
    in developing countries. The problem is that the pharmaceutical
    companies are reluctant to invest in research and development of
    vaccines for use in countries where there is a great need, but whose
    people cannot afford them.
        The GAO report will be the subject of a conference later this year,
    to try to develop a strategy for tackling this problem. I want to be
    sure that USAID participates in that conference.
        In the past two years we have added $100 million to support the new
    infectious disease strategy that USAID was instrumental in designing.
    One of the components of that strategy is strengthening global
    surveillance capabilities. Can you tell me what progress has been made
    on that? What about controlling malaria?
        Answer. The surveillance component of USAID's infectious disease
    strategy is focused on building in-country capacity for surveillance.
    This is a key element of a global surveillance network, and recognized
    by our partners as an area where USAID could play an important role.
        Over the past year, USAID has worked closely with WHO and CDC to
    develop appropriate regional and country strategies for improved
    surveillance systems; to undertake extensive assessments of
    surveillance systems in several countries; to improve laboratory
    capacity; and support epidemiological training. Over the course of the
    next several years, we will continue these interactions, and
    concentrate more intensively on helping a limited number of countries
    build surveillance capacities.
        While not funded under the infectious disease (ID) directive, you
    will be interested to know that under USAID's Polio Eradication
    Initiative substantial investments are being made to develop a global
    network of laboratories, surveillance personnel and communities for
    acute flaccid paralysis--the signal condition for polio. Drawing on
    lessons learned from this large global effort, and building on it where
    technically appropriate, is part of our infectious disease plan.
        In Africa, USAID has brought together WHO/AFRO, WHO/Geneva, the
    CDC, our Missions and Host Governments to identify a set of technical
    and geographic priorities to improve surveillance in the region.
    Activities include developing and implementing national plans of
    action, establishing sub-regional training centers of excellence,
    targeting key diseases such as malaria, meningitis and measles,
    initiating sub-regional cooperation and networking, and promoting
    political and fiscal advocacy to insure sustainability. Efforts in Asia
    focus on epidemiological networks to track key diseases such as
    pneumonia and dengue. Plans for centers of excellence and a sub-
    regional network to report and contain outbreaks are being worked on
    with WHO and CDC.
        Efforts to improve surveillance also require investment in better
    tools that can be used at the field level to identify diseases quickly
    and cheaply. For example, a simple diagnostics for active tuberculosis
    and malaria (see below) will be critical for effective control.
        Approximately $30 million of the $100 million appropriated by
    Congress for USAID's Infectious Disease Initiative has been targeted to
    support the prevention and control of malaria. In collaboration with
    the World Health Organization's new Roll Back Malaria initiative, the
    Centers for Disease Control and other partners, USAID has focused on:
        (1) Expanding the application of recently proven interventions for
    the prevention and control of malaria in Africa.--This has included
    scaling-up from earlier field trials in Kenya, Malawi, Benin, and
    Zambia. [In Zambia the new Infectious Disease funds has allowed USAID
    to leverage complementary resources from the Japanese Government--under
    the U.S.-Japan Common Agenda--to provide expanded malaria control to
    more than 50 percent of the Zambian population threatened by malaria]
    The infectious disease fund has also been used to expand country-level
    support to six additional African countries--Angola, Eritrea, Mali,
    Mozambique, Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
        USAID is also promoting a regional Africa insecticide-treated
    mosquito net initiative to support the strengthening of the African
    commercial sector capacity to provide comprehensive ``bednet'' services
    in up to six African countries--and provide protection to more than 12
    million African children over the next five years.
        (2) Extending USAID malaria activities to regions other than
    Africa.--Over the past two years the infectious disease fund has been
    used to expand USAID's malaria activities in Asia and Latin America,
    including the establishment of new bilateral programs in Nepal and the
    Philippines and providing expanded support to the co untries of South-
    East Asia and the Amazon basin of Latin America for the monitoring and
    control of new strains of drug resistant malaria.
        (3) Promoting the development and field testing of alternative
    malaria drug therapies.--With WHO we are currently supporting eight
    field trials of new drug-combination therapies. These trials will lead
    to the availability of new malaria drug therapy options by 2001--and be
    the basis for new longer-term strategies for slowing the emergence and
    spread of drug resistance.
        (4) Development of new technologies and approaches for prevention
    and control of malaria.--This work led to the field-testing of two low-
    cost malaria diagnostics. Initial trials conducted in Peru and Malawi
    have shown these diagnostics greatly enhance the ability of rural
    health workers to correctly diagnose malaria, resulting in timely and
    effective treatment. Based on these encouraging results WHO will
    convene a consultation this August to examine best strategies for
    widescale introduction of these new diagnostics.
                                    hiv-aids
        Question. In your testimony you mentioned that the Administration's
    budget fiscal request for HIV/AIDS is $127 million, a $2 million
    increase over fiscal year 1999. The rate of HIV infection is increasing
    by 15 percent per year. Shouldn't we be treating this like the
    staggering health emergency that it is?
        Answer. We agree that over the past decade there has been a massive
    expansion of the HIV/AIDS epidemic leading to a global crisis of
    unprecedented scale. There are now four times as many persons infected
    with HIV as in 1990 and the number of new infections per year now
    exceeds six million. AIDS is now the leading cause of death in Africa
    and the fourth leading cause of death globally.
        The U.S. Government response to the global HIV/AIDS pandemic began
    in 1986 and since that time we have contributed $1.143 billion to the
    effort, of which $650 million has been expended in sub-Saharan Africa.
    Since 1991, the U.S. has been the lead donor, contributing 25 percent
    of the budget for UNAIDS and nearly 50 percent of overall development
    assistance devoted to HIV/AIDS prevention and mitigation in the
    developing world. The U.S. contribution of $125 million in fiscal year
    1999 is four times more than the next largest bilateral donor
    (Netherlands).
        It should not be the sole responsibility of the USG to fund the
    international response. It is essential that other donors, lending
    agencies, multinational corporations, and especially host country
    governments also increase their financial contributions. However, we
    acknowledge the leadership role that the U.S. plays globally and the
    urgent need to expand the international response. Thus, we are
    exploring with OMB various options to increase the U.S. response.
        Besides requesting increased funding, it is important to note that
    USAID is also pushing forward with multiple new initiatives within our
    existing funding levels to accelerate and expand our assistance for
    HIV/AIDS prevention and care, particularly in the hardest hit
    countries. These initiatives include: (1) working with Department of
    Treasury to explore innovative uses of debt relief and debt swaps to
    increase in-country funding; (2) supporting a southern Africa regional
    initiative which will target cross border transport corridors for
    prevention activities; (3) collaborating with Department of State to
    more fully engage our diplomatic corps in advocacy and dialogue on AIDS
    issues; and, (4) as part of the UNAIDS-led ``Africa Partnerships
    Initiative,'' USAID is focusing on developing a continent-wide
    technical support platform for provision of technical assistance and
    for improved exchange of best practices and lessons learned.
                             hiv-aids--microbicides
        Question. USAID is spending a small amount each year to develop
    microbicides, which are products that would kill the AIDS virus before
    a person is infected. Several products are ready for testing on humans.
    This would be especially valuable for women in developing countries.
    Can you find out how much you are spending, and how the money is being
    used? I think we should do more on this.
        Answer. USAID has been supporting microbicide development and
    evaluation for the past 12 years, and since the mid-1990s it has
    accelerated its work in this area. USAID's support is channeled through
    three cooperating agencies (CAs): the Contraceptive Research and
    Development (CONRAD) project, Family Health International (FHI) and the
    Population Council. For the three-year period 1997-1999, USAID
    committed about $6.5 million for research on microbicides. In addition,
    USAID CAs leveraged an additional $4.0 million over this period from
    other donors.
        In August 1997, USAID commissioned an external expert panel to
    assess the status of microbicide development and suggest methods to
    accelerate the search for effective microbicides. The panel recommended
    that USAID could play a unique and complementary role in the following
    areas: increase public support and awareness for microbicidal products;
    identify potential markets for microbicides; increase the involvement
    of advocacy groups, especially domestic and international women's
    groups; and assist in the preparation for international clinical field
    trials.
        Although several products appear promising, a variety of technical
    and clinical problems have hampered the transition of microbicides from
    the laboratory to clinical studies, and no product is currently ready
    for final phase clinical testing. It is crucial to overcome these
    difficulties prior to the start of large Phase III clinical trials of
    effectiveness and safety.
        While increased funding could help accelerate the development and
    clinical testing of microbicides, USAID spends about 10 percent of its
    contraceptive research budget and about 30 percent of its HIV/AIDS/STD
    biomedical research budget on microbicides. This amount represents
    USAID's best judgment as to the proportion of microbicide funding in
    relation to other critical components of the response to the global
    AIDS pandemic.
                    hiv-aids--children affected by hiv/aids
        Question. AIDS, especially in Africa, is leaving millions of
    children orphaned and vulnerable. The number of children who have lost
    at least one parent to AIDS worldwide is expected to exceed 15 million
    next year. What is USAID doing to help meet the needs of these
    children?
        Answer. USAID recognizes and is deeply concerned about the growing
    number of orphans and vulnerable children in Africa and the growing
    numbers that are expected worldwide as a result of HIV/AIDS. During the
    past decade, the Agency has supported programs to address this issue as
    part of its HIV/AIDS prevention and mitigation efforts.
        Leading the call to action to recognize the severity of the
    situation of children affected by HIV/AIDS, USAID released a seminal
    report on World AIDS Day, 1997. ``Children on the Brink: Strategies to
    Support Children Isolated by HIV/AIDS'' helped to define the nature and
    magnitude of the problem and identified strategies to address it. It
    has been widely distributed and used as a guide in the development of
    activities worldwide. Through subsequent publications and inter-agency
    working groups, USAID continues to collaborate with partners in sharing
    information and working toward the expansion of activities. Recently,
    for example, a team of representatives from USAID and UNICEF conducted
    an assessment of the situation of children affected by HIV/AIDS in
    Kenya, resulting in a series of recommendations for a collaborative
    effort to strengthen care and support of these children. USAID is
    supporting an effort for continued exchange of information through the
    establishment and maintenance of an international electronic network by
    which practitioners and researchers can benefit from innovative
    projects for children affected by HIV/AIDS being conducted throughout
    the world. Operations research is being supported in Africa through the
    USAID funded HORIZONS project, which is identifying and evaluating
    community-based approaches to determine the most effective and
    sustainable methods of providing support to children and their
    families. The IMPACT Project assists USAID missions to implement HIV/
    AIDS a ctivities, including those that focus on vulnerable children.
    Working with indigenous NGOs, the International HIV/AIDS Alliance, also
    funded by USAID, builds local capacity to provide care and support to
    communities and families coping with HIV/AIDS.
        In addition, since 1991, USAID's Displaced Children and Orphans
    Fund (DCOF), has spent over $7 million in Africa supporting AIDS
    orphans programs. DCOF currently supports community-based programs in
    Zambia and Malawi, and will expand to other countries in Africa by the
    end of this year. In fiscal year 1999 Congress appropriated a $10
    million supplemental fund to be used by USAID to support activities
    focusing on children affected by HIV/AIDS. $7 million of these funds
    have been allocated for activities in African countries, including
    programs in Cote D'Ivoire, Kenya, Malawi, Nigeria, Rwanda, South
    Africa, Uganda, and Zimbabwe.
        USAID continues as a leader in the effort to prevent the
    transmission of HIV worldwide. It is through primary prevention that
    children of the future will be protected from the trauma of living with
    a parent who is ill or experiencing the death of a parent as a result
    of AIDS.
                      usaid contract costs--overhead rates
        Question. I was told that when you award a contract there are
    overhead costs that can exceed the actual costs to the contractor, but
    which reflect a government-wide formula. Is this correct?
        Answer. There is no ``government-wide formula'' related to
    overhead. Indirect cost rates (overhead) are calculated in a variety of
    ways and at the discretion of the contractor. The USG only ensures the
    methodology is equitable. There are more variations in methodology than
    I can count.
        Each contractor has a single cognizant government agency (that
    agency which provides the most funding to the contractor) who is
    responsible for ensuring the propriety of proposed indirect cost rates
    and issuing an indirect cost rate agreement which memorializes the
    agreement between the government and contractor. All other USG agencies
    doing business with this contractor honor this rate agreement. These
    rate agreements apply only to cost reimbursement type contracts.
        For most contract types, overhead costs are reimbursed at actual
    cost incurred and thus it is not possible to reimburse a contractor for
    more overhead cost than it has incurred. However, certain contract
    types include fixed pricing arrangements. In such cases, some or all
    costs are fixed at the time of the contract award. Generally an in-
    depth price analysis is performed to ensure the reasonableness and
    propriety of costs incurred before accepting proposed costs. Once a
    contract with fixed pricing terms is awarded, it is possible that the
    contractor will incur less cost than it actually is reimbursed for.
    Conversely, it is also possible that it will incur more cost than it is
    being reimbursed for and thus operates at a loss.
        It is very rare that a contractor incurs less cost than it is being
    reimbursed for at any material level. Fixed price contracts are
    generally competed heavily and thus competition forces a contractor to
    propose the lowest cost possible or it risks not getting the contract
    at all. In addition, knowingly proposing cost higher than what it
    expects to incur is a violation of the Truth in Negotiation Act, and as
    such is considered fraud and is prosecuted vigorously once identified.
                                   blindness
        Question. Each year, we ask you to spend $l million on medical
    procedures to enable blind children to see again. This can be done in
    many cases involving congenital blindness. In fact, there are an
    estimated l8 million people worldwide--children and adults--whose
    eyesight could be restored after a $50 operation.
        Do you know how much you are spending? I would like to have a
    detailed breakdown of how the funds have been used.
        Answer. USAID through its Office of Private and Voluntary
        Cooperation, in the Bureau for Humanitarian Response, has for a
    number of years given PVO grants for assisting blind children. Two PVOs
    with expertise in this area have received funds, both competitively and
    non-competitively, under these programs. They are Helen Keller
    International (HKI) and International Eye Foundation (IEF).
        The following table delineates the program activities and amounts
    of funding since l993.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                 Childhood blindness
       PVO          Project            funding                Purpose
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HKI......  SEE I...........  $2.4 million.......  To integrate eye care
                                 1993-1996..........   services into health
                                 FAO-0158-A-00-3077-   care delivery systems
                                  00.                  in the targeted
                                                       countries in a
                                                       sustainable and
                                                       efficient manner in
                                                       order to increase
                                                       availability, access,
                                                       reliability and
                                                       quality of eye care
                                                       services for those
                                                       most in need: women,
                                                       children and the
                                                       elderly. HKI trained
                                                       existing health care
                                                       workers in primary
                                                       eye care, pediatric
                                                       ophthalmic surgery
                                                       and administration;
                                                       equipped health
                                                       facilities with
                                                       ophthalmic equipment
                                                       and supplies; and
                                                       fostered community
                                                       involvement in the
                                                       planning,
                                                       implementation and
                                                       evaluation of eye
                                                       health services.
                                                       Countries include:
                                                       Morocco, Mexico,
                                                       Tanzania, Bangladesh
                                                       and South Africa.
    HKI......  SEE II..........  $2.4 million.......  To decrease the
                                 1996-2001..........   prevalence of
                                 FAO-A-00-96-90048-0   preventable blindness
                                  0.                   and eye diseases, and
                                                       to improve the
                                                       quality of life of
                                                       blind people in
                                                       selected communities
                                                       of Morocco, Tanzania,
                                                       and Mexico. Over the
                                                       life of the project,
                                                       SEE II continues to
                                                       foster sustainable,
                                                       efficient systems for
                                                       eye care delivery
                                                       through partnerships
                                                       formed among public,
                                                       private, and non-
                                                       profit sectors.
    IEF......  Sight Reach.....  $700,000...........  To correct the acute
                                 1993-1995..........   imbalance of eye care
                                 FAO-A-00-93-00053-0   services in targeted
                                  0.                   countries by
                                                       providing young
                                                       ophthalmologists with
                                                       an appropriate
                                                       incentive to move to
                                                       rural areas of
                                                       smaller cities where
                                                       no eye care services
                                                       were available. In
                                                       addition the program
                                                       targeted blind and
                                                       visually impaired
                                                       children by
                                                       aggressively seeking
                                                       them out and
                                                       providing sight-
                                                       restoring operations
                                                       where appropriate.
                                                       Target countries
                                                       include Albania,
                                                       Eritrea, Guatemala,
                                                       Malawi, and
                                                       Nicaragua.
    IEF......  Seeing 2000.....  $1.6 million.......  To increase the
                                 1995-1998..........   quality and quantity
                                 FAO-A-00-95-00015-0   of ocular surgery
                                  0.                   performed on children
                                                       in order to
                                                       ameliorate childhood
                                                       blindness. IEF
                                                       strengthened national
                                                       and international
                                                       NGOs and charity
                                                       hospitals in
                                                       developing countries
                                                       to expand and improve
                                                       their clinical and
                                                       surgical services to
                                                       blind and visually
                                                       impaired children.
                                                       Small 1-to-2-year
                                                       grants ($5,000 to
                                                       $25,000) were
                                                       provided to qualified
                                                       organizations whose
                                                       proposals fit
                                                       specific but flexible
                                                       criteria. Thirteen
                                                       target countries in
                                                       Eastern Europe,
                                                       Africa, Asia, Central
                                                       and South America.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                  agriculture
        Question. In last year's Statement of Managers we discussed the
    dramatic decline in funding for agriculture programs at a time when the
    challenges facing the rural poor are growing. In your written testimony
    you also mention the importance of these programs and the need for food
    security. We recommended $305 million for agricultural programs in
    fiscal year 1999. Can you tell me how much USAID plans to spend on
    these programs this year?
        Answer. Based on estimates which we are in the process of
    finalizing, and barring any unforeseen need to reprogram at the end of
    the year, we should be able to meet this level of $305 million for
    agricultural programs in fiscal year 1999.
                                maternal health
        Question. Each year over half a million women die from
    complications of pregnancy and childbirth--about one every minute. Last
    year we encouraged USAID to spend $50 million on maternal health. What
    amount of these funds is directed specifically at reducing the number
    of maternal deaths?
        Answer. In fiscal year 1998, USAID spent approximately $50 million
    on activities that improve maternal health and an additional $7 million
    on activities to reduce maternal mortality. These Child Survival and
    Disease Account funds support programs around the world in more than 35
    countries. Most causes of maternal death are preventable: severe
    bleeding, infection, consequences of unsafe abortion, hypertensive
    disorders and obstructed labor. With the $7 million for maternal
    survival, USAID emphasizes helping women and families prepare for a
    healthy delivery, ensuring quality care during and after childbirth and
    improving the management of pregnancy complications. The $50 million
    for maternal health includes enhancing the nutrition of women,
    particularly iron and folate supplements, as well as overall
    improvement in nutritional status; optimal timing of pregnancy; birth
    preparedness, prevention and control of infection including malaria and
    STDs; attended deliveries and post-partum care.
        USAID recognizes the profound impact maternal survival has on child
    survival by focusing attention on interventions that improve the
    survival of the mother-infant pair. Children whose mothers die are
    themselves 3-10 times more likely to die. Worldwide, deaths among
    children in the first month of life account for 60 percent of all
    infant mortality--with about 66 percent of these deaths occurring
    within the first week of life. Significant overlap exists between the
    actions needed for maternal survival and the actions needed for newborn
    survival. USAID addresses many of these preventable newborn deaths
    through clean and safe birth, maintaining body temperature,
    resuscitation, and immediate breastfeeding.
                                      cuba
        Question. USAID is responsible for managing programs to support
    humanitarian and other assistance to pro-democracy groups in Cuba. Yet
    the USAID person responsible for these programs has been unable to
    monitor the funds to be sure they are spent properly. I want to be sure
    the assistance gets to the right people. Can you find out if this is
    being done?
        Answer. The objective of the USAID program is to increase the free
    flow of accurate information on democracy and human rights to, from,
    and within Cuba. As you know, the Cuban Government opposes this
    program, and is doing whatever it can to impede it. End use monitoring
    is, for this reason, very difficult.
        USAID is actively pursuing ways to monitor end use and impact of
    program assistance, through surveys, interviews with travelers to the
    island, and other modalities. The USAID Senior Advisor for Cuba visited
    the island in July 1998, and has requested a Cuban visa to return. He
    meets regularly with program grantees to ensure their activities are
    consistent with program objectives. The U.S. Interests Section in
    Havana assists with end-use monitoring to the extent practicable.
        While the Cuban operating environment does not afford us the same
    freedom to monitor end-use and impact that we would find in other
    countries, we do have reliable reports which indicate Cuba's pro-
    democracy groups welcome and appreciate our support. It is also clear
    the Cuban Government fears the impact of our program, because they
    continue to stridently denounce it.
                                 lori berenson
        Question. Our Statement of Managers last year called on the USAID
    Administrator and others to use their ``financial resources and
    influence'' to encourage the Peruvian Government to ensure that U.S.
    citizens imprisoned in Peru are treated humanely and given fair trials.
    Despite this, Lori Berenson has begun her third year in a Peruvian
    prison waiting for a fair trial. Do you recall doing anything in
    response to that request?
        Answer. Because the Lori Berenson case is a sensitive one involving
    a U.S. citizen incarcerated abroad, it falls under the purview of the
    U.S. Department of State. I have relayed the Committee's concerns on
    this case to the appropriate officials at State and they inform me that
    the status is as follows:
        The U.S. Government continues to urge the Government of Peru to
    grant Lori Berenson a fair trial in civilian court with full due
    process protection, and to provide her with humane prison conditions in
    the meantime.
        Consular officers visit Ms. Berenson regularly and monitor her
    welfare between visits through telephone conversations with her
    occasionally and with prison officials weekly. From December 1995
    through May 5, 1999 Ms. Berenson received 36 consular visits.
        U.S. officials in Lima and in Washington continue to raise the case
    at every appropriate opportunity with high-level Peruvian Officials,
    including President Fujimori. We have also urged the Inter-American
    Human Rights Commission to the OAS to act promptly in response to Ms.
    Berenson's complaint against the Government of Peru. The Commission
    will hold hearings on Ms. Berenson's case in its next session in
    September.
                                     ______

               Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg

                          unfunded assistance programs
        Question. What foreign assistance activities and programs could you
    undertake or expand if foreign affairs spending were increased beyond
    the level of the budget request, and how would this contribute to U.S.
    policy goals?
        Answer. USAID supports the President's request for fiscal year
    2000. We believe that the total request for fiscal year 2000 is
    sufficient, in view of the Administration's commitment to balance the
    budget and the many competing claims on government resources. The
    budget difficulties that USAID has faced have stemmed from the
    significant restrictions attached to our funds, as much as from overall
    reductions.
        While USAID is able to be responsive to a number of transnational
    and social priorities, such as infectious diseases, child survival,
    family planning and global climate change, we do so at the expense of
    funding for economic growth and democracy activities. The shortage of
    funds for these activities has limited our work in areas such as
    criminal, property and contracts law, dispute resolution, trade,
    prudential regulation of banking and securities sectors, rule of law
    and crisis prevention.
                    offsets in central america supplemental
        Question. The supplemental appropriations bills to provide disaster
    relief for countries hit by hurricanes Mitch and Georges as well as aid
    to Jordan, which are now in conference, include offsets different from
    those in the Administration's request. Could you explain your concerns
    with the offsets included in the Senate and House bills? Would you
    agree that the best solution at this point would be to use the
    President's emergency designation to fund this urgently needed relief
    without offsets?
        Answer. I certainly would agree that there should be an emergency
    declaration without offsets for this funding. In light of reductions
    which have already occurred in many of our current programs, we take
    exception to reducing these programs further.
                    wye aid for israel and the palestinians
        Question. The supplemental appropriations bill now in conference
    includes $100 million for aid to Jordan, but it does not include the
    Wye aid package for Israel and the Palestinians submitted with the
    President's budget request. The Chairman of the full Committee, Senator
    Stevens, has said that he believes the Appropriations committee should
    do only one supplemental bill this year. In light of this, do you agree
    that the fiscal year 1999 funding for aid to Israel and the
    Palestinians to help implement the Wye River Memorandum should be
    included in the supplemental bill now being considered, so the U.S. is
    prepared to fulfill its commitments as soon as Wye implementation is
    back on track?
        Answer. I wholeheartedly agree with you. It is very important to
    provide this funding.
                                     ______

                   Questions Submitted by Senator Larry Craig

             collaborative agri-business assistance program (casp)
        Question. There is a specific agricultural development program
    under USAID that I would like to call to your attention. In 1993, USAID
    combined its partnerships with four universities into one program,
    called the Collaborative Agri-business Support Program or CASP.
    According to repeated evaluations by USAID over the past few years,
    this program has successfully met critical agricultural development
    needs in developing regions around the world. Those evaluations also
    note that these university programs achieved some noteworthy successes,
    despite continuing decreases in support and funding from USAID. In
    addition, there has been repeated congressional support for this
    program in its current form, and this support has been as recent as
    last year's Senate and House committee reports. However, a recent
    letter from your agency clearly spelled out its intent to eliminate its
    partnership with these institutions. Can you explain why the
    Administration would choose to break this productive partnership?
        Answer. I agree that CASP has been a useful and important
    collaboration between the universities and USAID. We have made
    important strides in improving post-harvest handling of seeds, grains,
    and other commodities under the CASP and predecessor programs.
        The current CASP program ends in September 1999. USAID believes
    this is an opportunity to take the CASP concept a step further. For
    fiscal year 2000, we intend to implement a new, dynamic, market-driven
    program focused on food industry development that will build on the
    CASP's accomplishments.
        The new program will emphasize adding value and enhancing
    competitiveness by improving the quality and safety of products
    entering the global market. Among other benefits, we expect this
    approach to catalyze partnerships between U.S. agribusinesses and
    growing private sectors in USAID countries.
        USAID is working closely with U.S. universities to develop this new
    program. As required by Federal assistance procedures, the Agency will
    hold a competition to select the implementing institution for this new
    program. Typically, USAID awardees consist of consortia of universities
    and private organizations. We look forward to the participation of CASP
    universities in this competition.
                                     ______

                    Questions Submitted by Senator Herb Kohl

                          humanitarian food assistance
        Question. Identify the source of U.S. funds to be provided to meet
    the food aid needs in the [Kosova] region. Explain why there was no
    request for supplemental PL 480 funds; and provide the Administrations
    position regarding the pending recission and proposed 2000 reduction in
    PL 480 especially in the context of the needs in Kosova.
        Answer. Food aid needs for the people of Kosova will be met from
    three sources: PL 480 Title II emergency funding, Section 416(b)
    surplus disposal and the Emergency Food Reserve.
        The Administration requests $787 million of Title II development
    and emergency food assistance and no Title III food for development for
    fiscal year 2000. We estimate an additional $50 million of prior year
    Title II resources will be available. This will permit a program level
    of $837 million, the same level as this year. Using the authority
    provided under Section 416(b) of the Agriculture Act of 1949, the
    Department of Agriculture met emergency food requirements in a number
    of countries. We can also draw from the Food Security Commodity Reserve
    to help meet emergency food needs.
        The Title III program is an important tool in our food aid arsenal,
    but it is not critical for emergency response as is Title II or section
    416(b). While no Title III funds have been requested for fiscal year
    2000, the Title III program authority will remain available for
    possible use, with funds transferred from other titles (up to 15
    percent of each title).
        The Administration opposes the pending recissions, especially given
    pending needs in Kosova.
        [Note: The Fiscal Year 1999 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
    Act which was passed on May 20, after this hearing, and signed by the
    President the following day provides for an additional $149.2 million
    in Public Law 480 Title II funding for Kosova and other emergencies.]
                                     ______

                  Questions Submitted by Senator Arlen Specter

                             carelift international
        Question. The fiscal year 1999 Senate Operations Appropriations
    bill directs USAID to make at least $3 million available to Carelift
    International to continue to expand its hospital development programs
    overseas. Will you please explain why USAID is unable to allocate at
    least $3 million from fiscal year 1999 funds to the Carelift project?
        Answer. USAID's funding available for health in ENI is neither
    sufficiently large nor sufficiently flexible to meet the Committee's
    target. Including the increases of this past year, health constitutes
    about six percent of the overall NIS assistance budget. Of this amount,
    approximately 80-85 percent was already programmed through
    Congressional earmarks and directives. These directives include women's
    health, programs to control infectious diseases, and U.S./NIS health
    partnerships. Our heavily earmarked health portfolio has strictly
    limited program flexibility and its ability to respond to additional
    directives, impending health crises or promising opportunities. Amidst
    other urgent and competing demands, the Office of the Coordinator for
    NIS Assistance did identify $1.5 million in performance funds for the
    Carelift program.
        I am pleased to report that discussions between Carelift and USAID
    are moving well and expeditiously. We recently received a revised
    proposal from Carelift. Once a cooperative agreement is in place,
    Carelift and USAID are both confident that Carelift will be able to
    demonstrate its value-added to USAID programs in the region,
    encouraging the partnership to continue based on Carelift's
    demonstrated merits.
        Question. As you are aware from your meetings with my staff, since
    1992, American medical and dental relief efforts in the former Soviet
    Union have relied on U.S. military and DOD surplus. Now that this
    supply has been exhausted, USAID must utilize the private sector in
    order for this valuable program to continue. The Carelift program has
    functioned with great success for 7 years and has recently partnered
    with an Atlanta firm to expand its operation by another 500 donating
    hospitals. Is USAID prepared to fund this valuable project in
    accordance with its capability in fiscal year 2000?
        Answer. The Department of State has informed me that humanitarian
    relief and transport specialists from the Department of State briefed
    Senate staff on the continued provision of surplus Defense Department
    medical supplies to the former Soviet Union. These specialists indicate
    that the supply of Department of Defense medical surplus is far from
    exhausted. I am pleased to inform the Committee that, during fiscal
    year 1998, over $58 million of DOD excess property was provided to the
    former Soviet Union through Operation Provide Hope. The State
    Department--implemented Operation Provide Hope expects to provide
    another $50 to $60 million in DOD excess medical property to the NIS in
    fiscal year 1999. In comparison with programs implemented by the
    Department of State and the Department of Defense, USAID's comparative
    advantage in the ENI health sector has been its ability to provide
    effective technical assistance and training to strengthen the capacity
    of ENI ministries of health, hospitals, non-governmental organizations,
    and other health related organizations. Typically, medical equipment
    and supplies have been funded by USAID only to the extent to which they
    are essential to the programs' technical assistance and training
    objectives. The health partnership program, administered by the
    American International Health Alliance (AIHA), is the one USAID health
    program that has provided substantial medical equipment, and that
    equipment normally is donated by the U.S. partners themselves. I
    anticipate that some level of medical equipment will continue to be
    needed to complement the partnership program. I further anticipate that
    the Carelift/AIHA partnership, just now beginning, will continue based
    on its demonstrated merits. In addition, we are impressed that
    Carelift's record demonstrates that USG financial support is not
    necessary for the program to succeed.

                              subcommittee recess

        Senator McConnell. The subcommittee will stand in recess
    until 2:30 p.m., Wednesday, May 19 when we will receive
    testimony from the Honorable Robert E. Rubin, Secretary of the
    Treasury.
        [Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., Thursday, April 29, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 2:30 p.m.,
    Wednesday, May 19.]

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                  ----------

                            WEDNESDAY, MAY 19, 1999

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 2:35 p.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mitch McConnell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators McConnell, Bennett, and Leahy.

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                            Office of the Secretary

    STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT E. RUBIN, SECRETARY OF THE
                TREASURY
    ACCOMPANIED BY HON. WILLIAM SCHUERCH, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR
                INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, DEBT AND ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MITCH MC CONNELL

        Senator McConnell. This hearing will come to order.
        Mr. Secretary, we want to welcome you for what we assume
    will be your last appearance before the subcommittee. I notice
    that Bob Samuelson picked up on the President's suggestion that
    you were the finest Secretary of the Treasury since Alexander
    Hamilton in his column this morning. While he did not quite
    second that observation in its entirety, it was certainly a
    very favorable piece. I want to join with many, many others in
    congratulating you on an outstanding tenure in public service,
    and indicate to you it has been a pleasure working with you.
        Secretary Rubin. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

                    prepared statement of Senator Lautenberg

        Senator McConnell. Senator Lautenberg was unable to attend
    this hearing, we have received his prepared statement and will
    insert it into the record at this point.
        [The statement follows:]
                 Prepared Statement of Senator Frank Lautenberg
        Mr. Chairman, I join you in welcoming Secretary Rubin for his
    likely final appearance before this subcommittee. Mr. Secretary, you
    know that while we understand your desire to move on to new challenges,
    your leadership will be missed.
        The Foreign Operations subcommittee is an appropriate venue to pay
    tribute to your stewardship of the U.S. economy because our well-being
    depends on the health and growth of the global economy. Your skillful
    application of the financial and intellectual resources of
    international financial institutions has minimized the impact of
    instability in Russia and Asia on our own economy.
        More importantly, you have helped mobilize and steer international
    efforts to help affected countries overcome the sudden outflow of
    capital. The Asian financial crisis will not be over for some time--
    certainly for people out of a job or grossly underpaid after high
    inflation--but the macroeconomic and institutional groundwork has been
    laid in most of these countries.
        I know your Deputy, Larry Summers, has worked closely with you. The
    President's decision that he should succeed you--and I hope his
    confirmation will be completed quickly--represents continuity which
    bodes well for America's economic future.
        Mr. Chairman, I am concerned that our arrears to the Multilateral
    Development Banks--our failure to make timely payments to fulfill
    negotiated commitments--may be reducing our influence in these
    institutions, just as it does in the United Nations. I hope we will be
    able to at least fulfill the President's budget request to make further
    progress in paying down those arrears.
        I do have other concerns, including the proliferation of
    international financial institutions and the substantial overhead costs
    of these institutions, which I will raise when we get to questions.
        Mr. Secretary, I hope you will also share with us your views on how
    the international financial system can be strengthened to reduce
    dependence on intervention, and how we can break the cycle of
    indebtedness of the worlds poorest countries, many of which are in
    Africa.
        Mr. Chairman, I look forward to Secretary Rubin's recommendations--
    including long-term recommendations beyond the scope of the present
    appropriations request--to help provide economic opportunity around the
    world which benefits Americans while helping others.
        Thank you.

        Senator McConnell. We have certainly enjoyed a constructive
    working relationship. Looking at the issues that you typically
    bring before this subcommittee, we are almost clear of all
    arrears at the various international financial institutions,
    and have replenished the IMF coffers. Your departure is well-
    timed, in that I doubt you will want to repeat the IMF
    replenishment experience, so you leave before we face a new
    request to recapitalize the World Bank.
        On balance, I think the multilateral banks have moved in
    the right direction to improve their process of evaluating
    projects and delivering loans and support. Transparency and
    integrity have been introduced into their vocabulary during
    your tenure, frequently with a little nudging from the Hill.
    Certainly those are positive developments.
        I remain concerned, however, that the lending policies are
    not yet contributing to credible economic results. The issue I
    want to focus on today, in fact, is that one.
        My concern was summed up by an expert on the international
    banks, who said: ``Their officials believe there is no problem
    a country or an institution faces which cannot be fixed by a
    loan.''
        Historically, the banks and their employees are encouraged
    to move money. In many cases, this lavish lending pattern has
    created crushing debt burdens because the recipients'
    financial, tax, trade, and related policies are
    counterproductive to achieving the growth necessary to either
    pay back the debt or prosper.
        In this context, I am concerned that your request for
    various debt relief initiatives may simply sustain failing
    countries and failed policies. The key component of the
    administration's request is support for the Heavily Indebted
    Poor Countries' Trust Fund, which will leverage contributions
    to cover debt primarily extended by the African Development
    Bank and Fund. This means we are establishing a new debt relief
    effort to cover old debt relief programs that obviously failed
    to produce results.
        Perpetually recycling relief payments is probably not
    working. We need to understand why you think this effort will
    make a difference this time, especially since this support
    comes at the expense of both our contribution and the sales of
    up to 10 percent of the IMF's gold holdings.
        We have heard from a number of members and entities,
    alarmed by the potential impact of these sales. The issue of
    weak policy standards and chronic recycling of loans is not
    unique to Africa. I am concerned by the international
    institutional approach in Russia and Indonesia as well. In both
    of these cases, I want to be assured that lending policies have
    not preempted sound economic conditions and requirements.
        For example, I understand Jakarta has loans pending World
    Bank Board decision, totalling nearly $1.5 billion. I think
    this disbursement at this particular moment for these projects
    would be perceived as offering political support to the
    incumbent candidate in the June elections. I realize Treasury
    officials are monitoring this decisionmaking process closely,
    and it is not entirely within our control. But I would urge you
    to encourage the Bank to delay disbursement until after the
    elections, to avoid any charges of political manipulation.
        Let me also say that Senator Leahy, my friend and colleague
    and the ranking member, is on the floor managing a bill, and
    asked me to extend to you his apologies. You are certainly
    aware of his admiration for your performance. If there is some
    chance to get here, he will certainly do that before we are
    finished.

                      summary statement of robert e. rubin

        So with that, Mr. Secretary, why don't you give us your
    opening observations, and then we will go to questions in what
    should be a relatively brief hearing.
        Secretary Rubin. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I
    appreciate your personal comments.
        Let me comment briefly about the year 2000 budget request,
    and then let us discuss anything that you would like. I think
    you have raised a whole host of subjects that, at least in my
    judgment, are indeed very important subjects.
        Let me start by saying that I think that, without question,
    this committee's approval last year of IMF funding and NAB
    funding was critically important in what has been a lot of
    progress with respect to the financial crisis of the last
    couple of years. I believe, as I get ready to step down from
    the Treasury Department, your continuing support of Treasury's
    programs with respect to the international financial
    institutions is enormously important, not only to the well-
    being of the rest of the world, but to the economic well-being
    of our country.
        Our request this year of $1.523 billion is slightly less
    than a 1-percent increase from last year and, in my judgment,
    is enormously important with respect to dealing with the
    effects of the economic crisis of the last couple of years, to
    promoting economic development around the world in developing
    countries, and also to providing debt relief, which we can
    discuss as you suggested.
        With respect to the economic crisis itself, Mr. Chairman, I
    think that the judgments of the international financial
    institutions have, on balance, been sensible in the face of
    complex and unprecedented circumstances. I do think that, while
    we have had a severe crisis in the last couple of years, we
    have avoided what could have been a far worse situation and one
    that could have severely affected this country. I think the
    international financial institutions deserve a great deal of
    credit for that.
        In addition, if you take a look at the countries that have
    taken ownership of reform--Korea, Thailand and, more recently,
    Brazil--there has been real progress. There is a great deal of
    work left to do in those countries, as well as more generally,
    but a great deal has been accomplished. We have worked to
    support foreign financial institutions, particularly focusing
    on transparency, on corruption--which I know is an issue of
    great concern to you--and their operations, on sensitivity to
    environmental and labor concerns, human rights, and a whole
    host of other measures directed toward establishing market-
    based economies in developing countries around the world.
        If you take a look at what has happened over the last
    several decades, even taking this recent economic crisis into
    effect, there has been a substantial improvement in the living
    standards in most, if not all, of the developing countries
    around the world. Again, I think the international financial
    institutions have been central to that accomplishment. As these
    countries have grown, they in turn have become better markets
    for American goods and services.
        In recent years, developing countries have been absorbing
    something like 40 percent of our exports. There has been a
    greatly heightened focus on combatting corruption. I agree with
    you, Mr. Chairman, I think it is immensely important,
    economically, as well as in social and moral terms. In fact I
    think corruption is in some cases the threshold issue. I have
    no doubt you will see, going forward, some substantially
    increased focus in these institutions on that issue.
        With respect to the debt burden, it is a complicated
    question. It seems to me that you have a tension between
    competing considerations. On the one hand, borrowers need to
    feel a very strong commitment to repaying their debt. It seems
    to me that serious consequences need to follow from not paying
    debts. Otherwise, it seems to me the international financial
    system is not going to work and credit will not flow. On the
    other hand, there are countries that develop such unsustainable
    debt burdens that they really cannot get back on a path of
    reform and growth unless something is done to ameliorate the
    debt burden. It is that conflict, that tension, that we have
    tried to resolve with the proposal with respect to revising
    HIPC as well as with respect to the existing programs with
    respect to which we request funding. In our judgment, an
    economically sensible balance has been struck between these
    competing considerations.
        As you observed, Mr. Chairman, we have made great progress,
    with the leadership of this subcommittee, in meeting our
    arrears and that progress in turn has been central in terms of
    the United States maintaining its leverage in these
    institutions. As you know, relative to the amount of money we
    contribute, we have an enormous influence in leveraging a
    vastly greater amount of lending. I think had we not paid our
    arrears, we would have put that leverage or influence at risk.

                               prepared statement

        Let me conclude by saying that I believe that the ongoing
    support of the international financial institutions, as well
    as, I might add, the United Nations, is in our economic
    interest. It is a very good investment of our dollars, and it
    is also in our national security interest. I would just say in
    closing that I enormously appreciate the relationship I have
    had with this subcommittee and with you, Mr. Chairman. We have
    worked through a lot of very difficult issues together.
        I know that everybody at Treasury is committed to
    continuing that relationship as we go forward in dealing with
    this budget and the issues that lie ahead. With that, I would
    be delighted to respond to anything you would like to discuss.
        [The statement follows:]
                     Prepared Statement of Robert E. Rubin
        Mr. Chairman, Senator Leahy, I appreciate the opportunity to
    testify today about the Administration's fiscal year 2000 budget
    request for Treasury's international programs. Last year, the
    leadership of this Committee was critical in approving the increase in
    our quota to the International Monetary Fund and our participation in
    the NAB, and that, in turn, was critical to dealing with the financial
    instability abroad, an effort that was so important to our own economy.
    This year, continued support of Treasury's international programs,
    which are central to the ongoing response to the financial crisis and
    to the overall effort to foster a healthy global economy, will promote
    the economic well-being of American workers, farmers and businesses.
        Our fiscal year 2000 request for these programs totals $1.523
    billion, an increase of less than one percent from fiscal year 1999.
    Our investment in these programs supports the international financial
    institutions--the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the
    regional development banks--in helping to restore financial stability
    where needed, in promoting long term sustainable growth in developing
    countries, and in working with developing countries committed to
    economic reform to reduce unsustainable levels of debt.
        With respect to the financial crisis, the International Monetary
    Fund, in close collaboration with the World Bank and the regional
    development banks, has developed new programs to bolster needed
    structural and policy reforms in the countries experiencing crisis,
    while at the same time helping protect the most vulnerable.
        I believe that, on balance, the IFIs have made sensible judgments
    in confronting the enormously complex and, in many ways, unprecedented
    issues posed by the financial crisis, and have adjusted their judgments
    when appropriate. At the same time, we can gain from a serious study of
    these activities, especially with respect to the reform of the
    international financial architecture.
        In those countries that have taken ownership of reform, for
    example, Korea and Thailand, there has been considerable progress
    toward a return to stability. Korea, which had less than $4 billion in
    usable reserves when the crisis came to a head in December of 1997, now
    has more than $55 billion. Short-term interest rates, which were as
    high as 35 percent at the end of 1997, now are at 5 percent.
        But despite this progress, much remains to be done. The problems
    that gave rise to the crisis took a long time to develop, and they will
    take time to work through.
        Here at home, while the most likely scenario remains solid growth
    and low inflation--subject to the usual ups and downs--certain sectors
    have been impacted by the crisis, some because of increased imports,
    and others because of decreased exports. Moreover, problems in the
    global economy do constitute a risk to our overall economic well being.
    That is why we have been enormously focused on the effort to restore
    stability and growth to troubled parts of the world, and the IFIs are
    at the center of this effort.
        In addition to their role in responding to the global financial
    situation, the IFIs have played an important role in other crises over
    the last year. For example, the World Bank and the InterAmerican
    Development Bank have provided $212 million to nations in Central
    America following Hurricane Mitch, and $600 million to nations affected
    by El Nino. And the IFIs are helping the nations of the Balkans deal
    with the immediate and longer-term consequences of the recent crisis
    there.
        Now, let me make several observations with respect to why the IFIs
    are at the center of our efforts to promote growth in the developing
    and transitional countries, growth enormously in our interest as these
    countries in recent yeas have purchased over 40 percent of our exports,
    as well as being at the center of our work to deal with the financial
    crisis.
        First, they internationalize the burden. In 1998, $1.4 billion in
    U.S. appropriations gave us great influence with respect to $57.1
    billion in total MDB lending.
        Second, our fiscal year 2000 request for the IFIs is about 5.5
    percent below last year's appropriation, with both years having
    included funds to pay arrears. On-going U.S. financial commitments to
    MDBs have been negotiated down by $700 million dollars per annum, or
    more than one-third since the mid-1990s, without a reduction in our
    influence. The United States has been a leader in shaping policies in
    the MDBs and most of our key developmental objectives are now broadly
    shared by other members.
        Third, because they are multilateral, these institutions have the
    ability to induce recipient countries to accept conditions that no
    assisting nation could obtain on its own.
        Fourth, each institution has expertise special to itself to shape
    effective reform programs.
        The United States, in concert with the international community, has
    worked forcefully with these institutions to reform their operations,
    reduce overhead, become more open, do more to prevent corruption,
    promote the private sector, and become more sensitive to environmental
    concerns, core labor standards and human rights. Under the leadership
    of Jim Wolfensohn, the World Bank has taken significant steps to
    improve operations. The United States and the international community
    are also looking very closely at the role of these institutions in the
    future international architecture.
        Mr. Chairman, let me now comment briefly on long term growth
    promotion in the developing world.
        The IFIs have been instrumental in helping countries throughout the
    developing world embrace market-based economic systems and become more
    fully integrated into the global economy. As a result, even taking into
    account the adverse impacts of the recent crisis, the last few decades
    have witnessed substantial improvements in living standards in most of
    the developing world. Infant mortality rates fell by nearly 50 percent
    from the early 1970s to the mid-1990s and life expectancy has risen by
    four months on average each year since 1970. Adult literacy has risen
    from 46 to 70 percent. As they have grown, these nations have turned
    into new markets for U.S. goods and services. In 1997, before the
    recent crisis, the developing world absorbed somewhat over 40 percent
    of U.S. exports.
        As an example of the IFI role, IDA is the world's largest lender of
    concessional resources for projects in areas such as health, primary
    education, nutrition, safe drinking water, and proper sanitation. For
    every dollar the U.S. contributes, IDA lends about 8.5 dollars for
    programs that promote higher standards of living and foster stability.
        Mr. Chairman, the IFIs have also greatly increased their
    involvement in combating corruption, which in addition to being a
    social and political issue, is also a critical economic issue, and an
    impediment to growth in many developing countries. IMF Managing
    Director Camdessus has been outspoken in his condemnation of
    corruption, and the IMF is increasingly giving explicit consideration
    to weakness in governance and to corruption in all its country
    programs. And under President Wolfensohn's leadership, the World Bank
    has become highly engaged in the fight against corruption. The Bank has
    developed new methodologies and techniques for analysis of the nature
    and extent of corruption in specific countries. Eleven countries have
    adopted this approach to help understand their corruption problems and
    to formulate targeted anti-corruption programs.
        Mr. Chairman, even with the efforts of the IFIs, the vast economic
    and human potential of the developing world has barely been tapped.
    Just last summer, for example, I visited Africa, a continent with
    enormous potential and enormous challenges and still largely left
    behind in the global economy. Clearly, in Africa, and elsewhere, the
    need for--and the importance of--the IFIs helping to bring developing
    nations into the economic mainstream has not abated.
        However, Mr. Chairman, bringing these countries into the economic
    mainstream often requires us to review the debt burden that they have
    accumulated over the years. The President has proposed a major debt
    reduction initiative to help promote the integration of the poorest
    countries into the world economy. It includes components providing for
    deeper or accelerated debt reduction and inclusion of additional
    countries into existing debt reduction programs, both multilateral and
    bilateral. Our policy tries to strike an economically sensible balance
    between competing considerations with respect to debt reduction. On the
    one hand, many developing countries are simply overwhelmed by
    unsustainable debt burdens. On the other hand, if the private sector
    does not believe that a country has a culture of credit in which there
    is a commitment to repaying debt, private sector capital probably won't
    flow to that country, and private sector capital is an absolute
    requisite for economic growth over time. In addition, if borrowers feel
    they are not going to have to pay back debt, it may result in unsound
    borrowing, which will then lead to future problems. Two additional
    points: Firstly, debt reduction is unlikely to have lasting benefit if
    not accompanied by meaningful economic reform, so that the resources
    freed up by debt reduction are used for good purpose. Secondly, our
    approach is designed to support substantial reductions in debt service
    payments and total debt burdens to levels consistent with what these
    countries can reasonably be expected to afford.
        In line with this analysis, our budget request includes $120
    million for debt programs, broken out as follows: $20 million for the
    traditional Paris Club mechanism, including reduction of U.S. debt
    under the initiative for the Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC)
    which was launched by the World Bank and the IMF in September 1996 to
    reduce debts to sustainable levels for those poor countries prepared to
    pursue economic and social policy reforms; $50 million for a
    contribution to the HIPC Trust Fund, which will be used to support
    reduction of debt owed to multilateral institutions; and $50 million to
    finance Debt Relief for tropical rainforest countries, as called for
    under the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998.
        In addition, we are requesting authorization to support IMF gold
    sales in order to provide additional support for HIPC countries. This
    proposal has received considerable attention. However, we believe it is
    reasonable for the IMF to use income derived from investments resulting
    from the sale of a small portion of gold reserves. The principal amount
    of the profits from such a sale would remain part of the IMF's
    resources.
        Before concluding, let me note that, with the leadership of this
    Committee, we have made great progress in clearing our arrears to the
    Multilateral Development Banks. If the fiscal year 2000 request is
    fully funded, our arrears will be reduced to $141.9 million. Delays in
    paying U.S. commitments on internationally negotiated agreements come
    at a high price in terms of our influence and effectiveness with the
    institutions and their members. We want to continue working closely
    with this Committee and the Congress to fully meet U.S. financial
    commitments.
        Mr. Chairman, Senator Leahy, let me conclude by reiterating that
    our strong support for the international financial institutions--as
    well as the United Nations--strongly promotes America's economic well
    being and national security interests. This Committee is central to
    providing that support, and we look forward to continuing our good
    working relationship as we deal with this budget request.

                            war in southeast europe

        Senator McConnell. Mr. Secretary, I want to start off in an
    area you probably thought you would not be asked about today.
    And that is the war in Southeast Europe. Clearly this is going
    to come to an end sometime soon. We are all assuming--and this
    comes from somebody who supported the President on the
    resolution for air strikes--we are assuming it is going to have
    a successful conclusion--success being defined as the President
    defined it: Kosovars back in Kosova, an international
    peacekeeping presence.
        Looking beyond that, there is no question that out of all
    of this is going to come a new and profoundly different
    relationship between this country and the countries with which
    we have had limited dealings in the past--Albania, Bulgaria,
    Romania, Macedonia, certainly Kosova, whether it is autonomous,
    independent, whatever it is, and maybe even Serbia, depending
    upon who is in charge of Serbia at that point.
        In short, I think it is reasonable to anticipate a long-
    term relationship maybe similar to what happened in the Middle
    East after the Camp David Accords. There has not been a foreign
    aid authorization bill that has become law since 1986. In fact,
    foreign assistance, whether it is bilateral or through the
    banks that you are principally interested in, comes through
    this subcommittee, through the appropriations process, on an
    annual basis.
        I have begun to give some thought to how we are going to be
    able to accommodate this new relationship in our foreign
    assistance budget, which could begin as early as the regular
    appropriation bill this year. And my question of you is: What
    kind of planning, if any, have you been involved with, looking
    beyond the end of the bombing, that may involve the European
    Bank, the World Bank and IDA, for the assistance to and
    reconstruction of this part of the world?
        Secretary Rubin. Well, I think your observation is well
    made. It was 3 or 4 weeks ago--I have forgotten exactly when--
    we had the IMF/World Bank meetings here, which were attended by
    the G-7 finance ministers and central bank governors. One of
    the finance ministers suggested that there be a special meeting
    to discuss Kosova. It is my recollection--I do not remember the
    exact number--that there were something like 30 finance
    ministers interested in discussing the very subject you just
    raised.
        At that meeting, the United States suggested that the World
    Bank and the E.U. together ought to coordinate a study of the
    reconstruction needs in a post-conflict situation and start to
    give some thought to a strategy that might be followed, as to
    how this funding would take place and how it would be arranged.
        There is a little bit of a model--and there are
    distinctions--but there is a little bit of a model from what
    happened in Bosnia and the reconstruction efforts with respect
    to Bosnia. So what we did was to charge the World Bank, but
    also the IMF, to begin devoting very serious resources to
    thinking about these issues. In addition, within the U.S.
    Government there have now been a number of meetings--I have not
    been actively involved in the meetings, but the deputies and
    the working group levels have been engaged--that have begun to
    think through how we go about or how the global community
    should go about dealing with this question of reconstruction.
        So I think it would be fair to say that there is a lot of
    focus on the issue, though it is still at an early stage in
    terms of planning. But as you correctly suggest, reconstruction
    needs to be a very high priority once the conflict is resolved.
    I think there is at least a very good and energetic focus on
    that issue now. I might add, I think, in having the World Bank
    and the E.U. coordinate this effort, it seems to me that the
    coordination process is in the right place. There will
    certainly be more than ample opportunity for the United States
    to participate with our thinking and our views.
        Senator McConnell. The only figure I have heard used--and I
    cannot remember over how long a period this was--was a $3
    billion figure. The assumption being that responsibility would
    be divided up largely as it is in NATO, with the United States
    having 25 percent and the rest of NATO having 75. Just assuming
    for the sake of discussion that that is a rough balance of the
    financial responsibility, do you know whether any of this is
    envisioned going through these banks? Just how is it going to
    be structured?
        Secretary Rubin. I have not seen numbers like that. I have
    seen other numbers, Mr. Chairman. I think it is too early to
    try to make a judgment as to what such a number might be. It is
    also too early to know how that financial responsibility might
    divide up. It is certainly anticipated by the United States--
    that is to say, by ourselves, and I suspect the other G-7 would
    agree with this--that the international financial institutions
    would bear very substantial responsibility not only in the
    planning and the strategizing, but also in the funding.
        But, clearly, I would guess--and this is getting ahead of
    where this process is--that there would also be a bilateral
    piece. I think the World Bank and the EBRD would play a very
    substantial role, and I presume the IMF as well, in certain
    respects, in the funding.
        Senator McConnell. Is not there a pretty widespread feeling
    that the World Bank has not been particularly effective in
    Bosnia? Certain things have worked in Bosnia, but it is not in
    better economic shape, is it?
        Secretary Rubin. I have the impression with respect to
    Bosnia--and I am not deeply knowledgeable about it myself--that
    some things have actually been more successful than you might
    have thought and other things have not been successful. So I
    think it would be fair to say that while some things have
    worked, other things have not. We probably ought to learn from
    the experience in Bosnia.
        Also, I would make a more general comment, Mr. Chairman. I
    do not think any of these things are going to be easy. You take
    a war-torn country or a war-torn region--the area you are
    talking about--with peoples that have had non-amicable
    relationships with each other over a long period of time, this
    is going to be a very major challenge, but I think it is a very
    important challenge. I think the response to the challenge is
    one that I have been impressed with, at least by the
    seriousness of purpose that has been expressed by the G-7
    ministers and by the World Bank people that I have spoken to
    about it. But this is going to be a long haul, not a short
    haul. I think the same is true in Bosnia, I might add.
        Senator McConnell. I am not criticizing you for the
    vagueness of your answers. Am I to assume that basically nobody
    has got the answer to this yet, or you just have not been in
    the meetings where the answers are formulating?
        Secretary Rubin. People in Treasury have been at the
    meetings. I have not. But that would require an amoeba-like
    quality about me. But I think that the idea that somehow or
    another we can come up with a solution that we can very quickly
    go from a concept to implementation to a result, is not
    realistic in this economic situation, Mr. Chairman. I really do
    think these things are going to take a long time and there are
    going to be some things that work and some things that do not
    work. We are going to have to have patience to work our way
    through them.
        I think I can say with a heightened degree of accuracy that
    nobody knows at this point what the valid numbers are going to
    be in this undertaking.
        Senator McConnell. I get the drift of your comments.
    Whatever planning is going on has not reached a stage where it
    could be presented to the Congress yet. Before you leave, you
    might want to suggest to your colleagues and the administration
    that this needs to be put on a little faster glide path,
    because it will be done through the appropriations process. It
    will be done through this subcommittee. We are going to be
    marking up the bill for this year soon. Even though we have
    fairly routinely done supplementals, including a rather
    generous one that will probably pass the Senate tomorrow, I
    think all of us feel that is really not the best way to go
    about this.
        I just wanted to leave you with the thought that I am
    interested in hearing, sooner rather than later, from people in
    the administration about what they may be requesting this year
    in relation to this subject.
        One other point in that area. If you do not know, maybe
    some of your staff will. With regard to the front-line states,
    and I mentioned some of them, do any of them have a significant
    bilateral debt to us, do you know?
        Secretary Rubin. Bilateral debt to the United States?
        Senator McConnell. Yes.
        Secretary Rubin. I do not know. We will get back to you on
    that, Mr. Chairman.
        [The information follows:]

    Frontline States' Public Bilateral Debt to the U.S. Government

                              [Dollars in millions]

            State                                                     Amount
    Albania...........................................................    $0
    Bosnia............................................................    50
    Bulgaria..........................................................    16
    Croatia...........................................................    86
    Macedonia.........................................................    99
    Romania...........................................................   236

        Senator McConnell. I am curious as to what our existing
    financial relationship, if any, is with countries like Albania,
    Rumania, and Bulgaria.
        Secretary Rubin. Deputy Assistant Secretary Bill Schuerch,
    who is here to respond to questions with me, says that there
    may be debts that are significant relative to those countries.
    But I would say with some confidence, although we will check
    the numbers, that they are not going to be significant relative
    to us, because the economies themselves are so small. But we
    will check that.
        Senator McConnell. Well, as I suggested, with all due
    respect to those countries, none of us have paid much attention
    to them.
        Secretary Rubin. That is correct.
        Senator McConnell. Either in the Congress or in the
    administration--this administration or any other
    administration. Clearly, what is going to come out of all of
    this is a new interest in all of these countries, which many of
    us probably would have had trouble finding on a map a while
    back.
        Secretary Rubin. Some of these countries, Mr. Chairman--as
    you probably know--do have existing IMF programs. Now, these
    programs are not designed to deal with this situation. So there
    are actually people who have done a fair bit of thinking about
    the economic issues that these countries face, but never in the
    context that they now face.
        Senator McConnell. Well, I am interested.
        Secretary Rubin. I have a suggestion, if I may. I think we
    are actually too early in the process. It is not due to a lack
    of focus. It is just the complexity and the speed with which
    this crisis has happened. I think we are probably too early in
    the process for a productive discussion. But at a time when
    people feel they can sit down and intelligently brief you as to
    where we stand, maybe the best thing would be to come by your
    office at your convenience, or at the convenience of your
    staff, whatever you prefer.
        Senator McConnell. Let me say this. I do not want to read
    about it first in the newspaper. We want to be on the ground
    floor. I am not hostile to having this relationship. We are
    going to have obligations after this.
        Secretary Rubin. I think that is a very constructive
    suggestion. Why do not we figure out how best to relate to you
    in a way that keeps you involved as the whole process moves
    along.
        Senator McConnell. Senator Bennett.
        Senator Bennett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, I did not know Alexander Hamilton. He was
    not a friend of mine, to quote your predecessor in the Treasury
    about another individual. [Laughter.]
        But I echo the kudos you received. And you know that our
    working relationship, primarily through the banking committee,
    has always been a very productive one and one for which I am
    grateful. I join the chairman in formally, in this forum,
    wishing you well in your new activities, whatever they may be.
        Secretary Rubin. Thank you.
        Senator Bennett. If you want to tip us off in advance so
    that we can invest, we would be appreciative of that, too.
    [Laughter.]
        Secretary Rubin. The question is whether you should invest
    long or short. [Laughter.]
        Senator Bennett. I am going to be parochial for just a
    minute. I think the questions you and the chairman have pursued
    are very legitimate questions. I would add simply the
    obligation for financial aid to Belgrade. We have bombed their
    economy back to World War II levels. When this gets resolved, I
    think the humanitarian impulses of the United States will be
    such that there will be pressure for us to do something for
    them, as well as the Kosovars. That was the case at the end of
    World War II.
        I know we have not done as much collateral damage as was
    done in World War II to the German economy or to the German
    conditions. But I think, in terms of the impact on the economy,
    we probably, with our new smart bombs, have done as much damage
    to Yugoslavia as we did to Germany in World War II. The demand
    for some kind of Marshall Plan will probably be just as great.
    So I hope you factor that into the decision of how much money
    we are going to have to deal with.
        You look as if you wanted to comment.
        Secretary Rubin. Just a slight point, Senator. The Marshall
    Plan was a massive undertaking. We have talked about how to
    characterize this effort and how to think about it and talk
    about it. I agree with the chairman. I think there needs to
    be--and there really is underway--a very serious process that
    is in its very early stages of trying to think through how to
    deal with reconstruction in this area, which is the point you
    raised. But calling this effort a ``Marshall Plan'' seemed to
    some of us sort of a misnomer, because that plan was a matter
    of such enormous magnitude in terms of our resources and our
    GDP and the like.
        Senator Bennett. I accept that. I am using the term
    ``Marshall Plan'' in terms of the intent and obligation.
        Now, as I say, I want to be parochial with you for just a
    minute. I will lead up to it by asking what the current status
    is of the IMF and the World Bank with respect to negotiations
    with Ecuador?
        Secretary Rubin. Well, with respect to Ecuador, there is
    now a preliminary agreement and an IMF program although my
    recollection, and I am quite sure this is correct, is that the
    funding side of it still needs to be worked through. And
    particularly, Senator, there are some questions that we
    obviously are very deeply involved in.
        The IMF is making a judgment about Ecuador's economy. But
    as one of the 182 member states of the IMF, we undoubtedly have
    views and express those views on the question of the private
    sector participation in that funding. There is a preliminary
    agreement, but the funding piece of it has not been fully
    worked out. A significant part of the whole program has to do
    with private sector involvement.
        Senator Bennett. I understand the size of the package is
    $1.4 billion. Is that about right?
        Secretary Rubin. I am not sure. Senator, I will have to get
    back to you on that.
        [The information follows:]

        Ecuador and IMF staff reached agreement on a Letter of
    Intent on 9/30. Board consideration of an actual program is
    contingent on significant prior actions, including fiscal and
    bank reform, and ``cooperative efforts'' to reach agreement
    with their creditors on debt restructuring. We would expect the
    World Bank and the IDB to offer special support only in the
    context of an IMF program.
        The Government of Ecuador is engaged in negotiations with
    the IMF and the multilateral development banks regarding an
    appropriate loan package. We understand the IMF is considering
    a $350 million 18-month standby arrangement and that the IDB
    and World Bank would consider a lending program of about $500
    million in the context of an IMF program. In addition, we
    understand that regional development institutions could provide
    up to $500 million. These figures are somewhat fluid, but the
    total could be around $1.4 billion.

        Secretary Rubin. Does that include the entire debt
    rescheduling? Because I do not know the answer to that.
        Senator Bennett. Well, I have a news summary here from the
    week of April 27 that says the Ecuador Minister of Finance
    traveled to the United States seeking assistance from IFI's,
    met with the World Bank, the IMF and the InterAmerican
    Development Bank and, in quotations, said:

        We applaud and admire the government's effort. Ecuador has
    a preliminary agreement on a $900 million international loan
    package. Of that package, $500 million will come from the World
    Bank and the Andean Development Corporation. The IMF has agreed
    to provide an 18-month loan that is expected to total $400
    million. Additionally, development banks plan to disburse $500
    million in projects this year, bringing the projected aid flow
    to $1.4 billion. An IMF agreement is expected by the end of
    May.

        Now, I do not know the complete accuracy of that. Those
    were the reports in the news, and that is where I am getting my
    numbers.
        Do you have a sense as to why Ecuador needs this kind of
    package?
        Secretary Rubin. My understanding, Senator, is that Ecuador
    is in very serious difficulty with respect to its economy more
    generally. It may, in some measure, be a function of what
    happened to oil prices. I think one of the factors, too, that
    is adding a little bit of uncertainty with respect to exactly
    how this program is going to be structured is trying to make
    some judgment about what is going to happen to oil prices.
    Because, as the chairman said in his opening remarks, you want
    to have a program that is sustainable over time, including
    accomodating the effects of the new debt that is going to be
    taken on. That sustainability, to some extent, will be a
    function of the revenues to be derived from oil.
        Senator Bennett. Well, now we get to the question that was
    raised in your conversation with the chairman, which, as I say,
    I am getting parochial, but every Senator around here is. Every
    time I raise that, Senator Byrd says do not apologize for being
    parochial, and then he gets another something for West
    Virginia. [Laughter.]
        I am concerned about official corruption in Ecuador, and,
    more specifically, in the judiciary. I have a constituent who
    has had a particularly distressing experience with the
    Ecuadorean judiciary. I will give you a letter outlining the
    details. Very briefly, they made the mistake, not realizing of
    course at the time that it was a mistake, of entering into a
    contract for a piece of land, when the owner of the land was a
    known criminal, one who had in fact fled Ecuador after
    perpetuating fraud on one of the largest banks in Quito, and
    lives in Peru. But he continues to own large tracts of land in
    Guyacaya. He is the one that sold the land to my constituent.
        Typical of his pattern, he did not pay any property taxes
    on the land. So when my constituent went to get a deed, the
    local official said, well, we will not hold you responsible for
    the back taxes because you did not own the land, but we will
    not give you a normal kind of receipt for the property taxes
    you pay. Then, because they were acting as I think any American
    corporation would, they withheld $18,000 from their final
    payment to this man for the land, he sued them for breach of
    contract. Through a series of circumstances that are outlined
    in the letter, my constituent has now been given a judgment in
    an Ecuadorean court of $800,000 that they owe this man.
        Secretary Rubin. This is the $18,000?
        Senator Bennett. They withheld $18,000 because he had
    failed to obey the law, and they were forced to make additional
    payments to cover his default. He said, well, you defaulted on
    the contract, went to court, $800,000, in arbitration, has now
    been granted against the American entity. When they seek any
    kind of appeal within the judiciary, they are told no appeal is
    possible.
        When I have raised the issue with the Ecuadorean Ambassador
    or the Ecuadorean embassy here, I am told the government has
    nothing to do with the judiciary and has no control over this.
    This is extortion of the first order. This is corruption of the
    judicial system. Quite aside from the question of what it does
    to my constituent, it raises the clear question for this
    committee of whether or not the government is in a position to
    control corruption sufficiently to repay these kinds of loans.
        If we are talking $1.4 billion, and then we can see it
    siphoned by known criminals in one way or another, it raises
    red flags. So I will give you the letter that outlines the
    detail, ask you to look into it, and would appreciate some kind
    of written response at some point. I do not want to mousetrap
    you here as to Treasury's position with respect to this kind of
    flagrant corruption in a government that is receiving foreign
    assistance.
        Secretary Rubin. Well, we would be delighted to take a look
    at it. I am not familiar with the particular circumstances, but
    we would obviously take a look at it and get back to you
    expeditiously.
        Senator Bennett. Thank you very much.
        I have no other questions, Mr. Chairman.
        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Senator Bennett.
        King Abdullah is in town this week. It is his first
    official visit to the United States. Obviously, things have not
    gone as well in Jordan as we had hoped on the economic side.
    Unemployment is officially at 15 percent, and in reality
    probably closer to 25 percent. In 1994, we forgave $700 million
    of Jordanian debt to us. I am curious as to what the current
    Jordanian debt situation is to us and, if you know, what kind
    of debts do they have to countries like Japan, Germany and
    France? What plans do they have, if any, to provide some debt
    relief?
        Secretary Rubin. I do not know whether you had a chance to
    meet the King when he was here.
        Senator McConnell. Not on this trip. I have met him before.
        Secretary Rubin. I must say, I had not met him before, but
    I was with him when he was with the President yesterday. Then
    Deputy Secretary Summers and I had a separate meeting with him
    for about 40 minutes or so. I thought it was quite interesting,
    actually. He seemed, to me at least, to have a very serious
    sense about economic issues and about what he needs to do, that
    very closely tracked our views. He had had an American
    management consulting firm do a study for him, which he is
    going to share with us. We have not seen it yet. Actually, our
    Ambassador has it. The King said he would get it to us
    forthwith.
        But I had a very good feeling about the sense of
    seriousness that King Abdullah conveyed, and also the view that
    he expressed with respect to what he needed to do. I think they
    do have serious problems. I think you are absolutely right. He
    seemed very much committed. At least he certainly expressed
    great commitment to doing something about their problems. The
    things he said about how he wanted to proceed, Senator, sounded
    quite sensible.
        In terms of debt, we did forgive a major part of their debt
    to the United States. I think they still owe about another $425
    million worth of debt to the United States, or something in
    that neighborhood. Their largest single creditor, I believe, in
    the G-7 is Japan. In fact, I am quite sure that is right. We
    have spoken with the other G-7 members about debt reduction for
    Jordan. Jordan obviously plays a critical role in terms of
    Mideast peace, and having a stable and economically successful
    Jordan is very important in a much broader sense.
        I cannot tell you, Mr. Chairman, because I do not know and
    nobody knows, how successful these efforts to get additional G-
    7 debt reduction will be, but we are very strongly supportive
    of debt reduction for Jordan, and also, separately and
    independent of that, of the Paris Club rescheduling process for
    Jordan.
        I actually do know the amount that Japan is owed by Jordan,
    but I do not know if that is a public number. I do know that
    number, which I can share with you. I am just not sure whether
    it is a publicly known number.
        Senator McConnell. Staff tells me I am seeing him tomorrow.
    I have met him before. He is an impressive man. And he has got
    his work cut out for him. Was he requesting additional debt
    relief from us?
        Secretary Rubin. No, not really. He has said publicly, I
    think, that he wants substantial debt reduction, and he has
    talked about the amounts that he wants. But I do not think his
    focus is on us. I think his focus really is mostly on Japan and
    also on some of the other G-7 nations. My recollection is that,
    aside from us, there are predominantly four G-7 nations that
    are the creditors he is focused on.
        Senator McConnell. We actually have $100 million for Jordan
    in the supplemental.
        Secretary Rubin. Yes, I know that.
        Senator McConnell. So we clearly would like to see him get
    off to a good start.
        Shifting to Russia, the Financial Times reports today
    that--not Russia, but the NIS--Ukraine is close to defaulting
    on $155 million linked to bond debt issued last year. The
    government has indicated it will swap 80 percent of the debt
    for new bonds, and pay 20 percent in cash upon maturity on June
    the 9th.
        Secretary Rubin. This is Ukraine you are talking about?
        Senator McConnell. Ukraine.
        What is your sense for whether this is going to fly and
    where is Ukraine's financial standing relative to the
    multilateral institutions in general? Where are they these
    days?
        Secretary Rubin. I would say that they are very troubled. I
    know you have focused on this problem. It is a very troubled
    economy. They, as you know, have had an on again, off again
    record in terms of complying with the conditions of their IMF
    programs. At the moment, I think there are some difficulties
    there.
        It has been the IMF's view, which we support, that if the
    Ukrainians work out their IMF difficulties and actually get
    disbursements on their program, those disbursements and the
    existing reserves--and they are not very large, as you know--
    ought not to be used to pay private creditors. Their payments
    to private creditors should come from the purchase of the
    relevant foreign currencies in the foreign exchange markets.
    They ought to preserve their IMF contributions to the central
    bank, plus their own rather limited reserves. That, at least,
    is our view.
        That then raises the question of whether they can in fact
    afford to buy the necessary foreign currencies to meet their
    payments, or if they will need to do what you just suggested--
    or I guess you read that from an article--work out some kind of
    an arrangement with their private creditors, which, I have a
    feeling, is where a lot of this is leading.
        Senator McConnell. Of course, they are having a
    presidential election this year, too.
        Secretary Rubin. They are, indeed.
        Senator McConnell. So that is another place where every
    step we take will be interpreted one way or another.
        Now, shifting to Russia. Last year, we learned the Russian
    Central Bank sent billions of dollars in foreign currency
    resources out of the country into a secret offshore account.
    These resources may have been redirected back into the high-
    risk Russian Government bond market. So several questions in
    relation to that: What is the agreement between the central
    bank and the government on how much of the bank's profits must
    be turned over to the government? Was this arrangement a
    motivating factor in the bank's diversion?
        Secretary Rubin. I do not know the answer to that question.
    As you probably do know, in the United States the Fed turns its
    profits over to the Treasury. I do not know what the
    arrangement is in Russia in terms of this offshore arrangement
    that you are referring to. As you know, PriceWaterhouse--I
    think, by the way, Mr. Chairman, and do not hold me to the
    exact numbers, there were many billions of dollars in the
    overall transactions, you are right, but I do not think there
    was ever more than about $1.4 billion or $1.3 billion or $1.5
    billion, something like that, in this offshore account at any
    one time.
        Be that as it may, that is a matter of great concern.
        Senator McConnell. That is the figure I have, $1.4 billion.
        Secretary Rubin. I think that was right. But clearly that
    is a matter of great concern.
        PriceWaterhouse is doing a study. The Managing Director of
    the IMF has said that the currently announced agreement, in
    principle, is not going to become an actual program with
    disbursements to Russia--well, with disbursements in the form
    that they would take place in this program--until the IMF is at
    least satisfied with respect to both the offshore account that
    you are talking about and also the $4.8 billion in July of last
    year.
        Senator McConnell. Apparently, the prosecutor, in
    developing the case, has been suggesting that the amount could
    have been as high as $37 billion.
        Secretary Rubin. That was the number that was used--you
    mean in the offshore account--I remember seeing that number. My
    understanding--and we will get a much better idea after we see
    the PriceWaterhouse study--is that that was sort of the total
    amount of transactions, if you will. But the actual amount at
    any given time was, as I said, was $1.4 billion or something
    like that.
        Senator McConnell. Do you know how much was invested in the
    Russian bond market? Do you know anything about that?
        Secretary Rubin. I do not know if anything--you mean in the
    offshore account? That is one of the allegations. I do not
    know, Mr. Chairman, whether in fact anything was invested. You
    are talking about the domestic bonds? I do not know if anything
    was invested in the domestic bonds. That is one of the issues
    that I presume PriceWaterhouse will look at.
        Senator McConnell. In short, we are not going to know much
    about this until we get a report from them?
        Secretary Rubin. That is true. But it is also true that the
    disbursement by the Fund will not take place until we get the
    report.
        Senator McConnell. I have several other questions related
    to this. I guess the answer is going to be the same--we do not
    know until we get the PriceWaterhouse report?
        Secretary Rubin. That is correct. What we really need in
    this whole situation is to get some independent, outside
    auditor to take a look at it. That is what PriceWaterhouse is
    in the process of doing on the offshore account.
        Senator McConnell. Do you have any idea what Russia's
    current foreign exchange reserves are? Is that a figure that is
    known?
        Secretary Rubin. It is a figure that I have in my mind.
    Whether the number I have in my mind is known or not, I do not
    know, Mr. Chairman. I do not know what figures they make
    public.
        Mr. Chairman, my recollection--and you can check me on
    this--is it is somewhere in the neighborhood of $11 billion. I
    do not know whether that is the net number or gross number. As
    you know, there are some countries that have a reserve
    position. I do not know that Russia has that.
        Senator McConnell. When is the PriceWaterhouse study
    supposed to be complete?
        Secretary Rubin. I think that is supposed to be completed
    relatively soon. But since Russia is not getting the
    disbursement without it, the study is going to be completed.
        Senator McConnell. You are very good, Mr. Secretary. What
    is the definition of ``relatively soon''?
        Secretary Rubin. Relatively soon is when it gets done.
    [Laughter.]
        But let me say, if it takes forever, which is a long time,
    that is Russia's problem, not our problem. [Laughter.]
        Because they are not going to get the disbursement in the
    form that it is going to take place, which, as you know, is a
    rather limited form to begin with, until the study gets done
    and turned over to the IMF. IMF has looked at it. So the
    Russians have an enormous incentive to get this done.
        Bill Schuerch tells me it was scheduled the end of April. I
    suspect they may not make that schedule. [Laughter.]
        Senator McConnell. Relatively soon has already passed.
        Secretary Rubin. Relatively soon has passed, and the future
    will be whatever it will be, I suppose.
        Senator McConnell. Well, giving up in frustration on
    Russia, let us move along to Asia.
        Secretary Rubin. Can I just say one thing, because I do
    think it is very important. I do not know when they are going
    to get this study done, but the Russians are not going to get
    anything directly in the form the disbursement is going to
    take. As you know, once this analysis all gets done and the IMF
    Executive Board approves the program, this money will never
    actually go to Russia. The money that is going to the Russia
    program is less than the money that Russia owes the IMF for the
    remaining period, and it will be disbursed as the payments
    become due to the IMF and will be used for that purpose.
        Senator McConnell. Well, give me some good news on the
    Russian economic front.
        Secretary Rubin. It is a complicated problem, Mr. Chairman.
    It really is. We, on the one hand, and the rest of the world,
    have an enormous stake in Russia's being successful. On the
    other hand, it goes back to what we talked about for the front-
    line states: These countries, and Russia particularly, have
    just enormous problems. They are not just macroeconomic, even
    though that is where the IMF focus has been, but they are
    deeply structural.
        Corruption, which I know concerns you, is a tremendous
    impediment to growth. In the absence of a legal system, a lot
    of privatization is taking place, but there is still a lot of
    publicly held property, particularly in the agriculture sector.
    The financial system is far from what is necessary to have a
    modern economy. There are vast problems. Progress is not going
    to happen quickly. It is going to take time.
        Now, having said that, it is interesting that the financial
    and economic collapse that many had thought would take place in
    the aftermath of last August's difficulties did not occur.
    Industrial production actually is now increasing in Russia. But
    I think you cannot judge this sort of month by month, quarter
    by quarter. My own view is--and as I have been saying for the
    whole 6 years of this administration--I think we have an
    enormous stake in Russia's being successful. I think there is
    no simple answer, no short-term answer. I think there are going
    to be ups and downs. If this is going to work, it is going to
    work over a long period of time, and there are going to be a
    lot of disappointments along the way.
        Senator McConnell. Let me ask you a couple of questions
    about Indonesia, and then I will be through. Pat can do what he
    would like to do.
        How much in funds and how many multilateral institutions
    have extended loans to Indonesia since the collapse last year?
        Secretary Rubin. I do not know the answer to that question.
    Mr. Schuerch may. There are $1.4 billion of World Bank loans.
    The IMF had a program that was discontinued and is now back on
    track. As you know, there are $1.4 billion of World Bank loans
    that are now going to be held up until after the election.
        I notice that you referred to that fact in your opening
    comments. Very much at the urging of the U.S. Treasury, but
    others as well, the judgment was made that the loans ought to
    be held up until after the elections. My recollection is that
    $1.4 billion is the aggregate amount of the loans.
        Senator McConnell. There are obviously specific performance
    conditions expected to be met before that, in layman's terms?
        Secretary Rubin. All of those loans are tied to specific
    programs and to specific purposes. With respect to the social
    sector loan, which is I think $600 million--and you can check
    my number--there is an additional protection, and I think very
    rightly so, that there will be a high level of transparency, so
    that the NGO's and others who are concerned about this can, in
    effect, keep track of this and make sure it is being used for
    the purposes for which it is intended.
        Senator McConnell. Focusing on the multilateral banks and
    their dealings with Indonesia, have they all had the same
    standards or have we had situations where, for example, the
    Asian Bank would deal with Indonesia differently from the World
    Bank?
        Secretary Rubin. Bill, do you know the answer to that?
        Mr. Schuerch. I think what you will find is that they have
    largely similar programs and conditions, but they are not by
    any means identical. They have been working together, the Asian
    Bank and the World Bank. And there are teams and joint meetings
    that have occurred. But it is certainly not fair to
    characterize their cooperation as being identical programs.
    They are consistent programs, but there is not identical
    conditionality in individual programs.
        Senator McConnell. Well, then, they are not dramatically
    different in the terms? Is it easier, for example, to get a
    loan from one than it is from another because of lower
    standards? How different are the hoops through which one has to
    jump to get a loan?
        Mr. Schuerch. I would say that largely they are the same.
    You will find, when you get into the very fine detail, that
    there is a level of difference in conditionality as you go
    along, depending on the type of loan that you are dealing with.
        Certainly, at times, not just on Indonesia but on other
    countries, we will find slight differences and slight
    aggravations between the institutions because of those
    differences. But the larger picture, the broad picture, is one
    where they are working together.
        Senator McConnell. But Secretary Rubin is correct, no
    disbursements are going to be made until the election situation
    is over; is that right?
        Mr. Schuerch. In relation to the four loans we are talking
    about, we have a commitment from Indonesia that they will not
    disburse during the first quarter of the fiscal year, which
    gets them past the election in June.
        Senator McConnell. The reason I am asking this is it is my
    understanding from staff that the Asia Development Bank has
    disbursed and the World Bank has not. Is that correct? And if
    so, why?
        Mr. Schuerch. The Asian Development Bank--I will have to
    look at the detail--did disburse. I believe there was a
    difference----
        Senator McConnell. Can you pull the microphone closer to
    you?
        Mr. Schuerch. The Asian Development Bank I believe did
    disburse on the loan--I am sorry--refused to disburse on a
    loan.
        Senator McConnell. Did or did not?
        Mr. Schuerch. Did not.
        Senator McConnell. Did not.
        Mr. Schuerch. Refused to disburse on the loan.
        But I think the best thing for us to do is to come back to
    you with the specific details on specific loans, and work it
    through that way.
        [The information follows:]
        Indonesia--Standards for Disbursement of Funds Between the IFIs
        As a general rule, the United States has strongly advocated that
    the MDBs have similar policies, conditions, pricing, etc., in order to
    ensure consistency in their treatment of individual borrowers and to
    prevent countries from trying to obtain better treatment in one MDB
    than in another.
        The World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) have been
    working very closely on their assistance to Indonesia in particular. As
    a result, they are generally following the same approach in their
    lending and other operations, and the conditions that must be met in
    order for disbursement of funds under their respective loans are
    consistent and often mutually reinforcing.
        One example is the support that the two banks have given to
    financial sector reform in Indonesia--a major priority for us and for
    the international financial institutions. Soon after the onset of the
    economic crisis in Indonesia in mid-1998, the World Bank, ADB, and IMP
    agreed to share responsibility for reform of the financial sector, with
    each taking the lead in areas in which it has a comparative advantage.
    The World Bank has focused on bank restructuring, in conjunction with
    the IMF; the ADB has concentrated on strengthening the central bank and
    reforms in Indonesia's capital markets. The three institutions have
    consulted effectively in this effort, have done a substantial amount of
    joint work, and are monitoring progress closely.
        Both institutions have been responsive to our concerns about the
    broader context of their operations. The ADB had considered making a
    $250 million loan to Indonesia prior to the June 7 elections, but chose
    to postpone consideration by its Board until the election was
    completed. In part at our urging, the World Bank decided that there
    would be no disbursement under a $600 million social safety net loan,
    approved before the election, until all the conditions of effectiveness
    had been met. One of the key conditions is that a mechanism to allow
    representatives of civil society in the country to monitor the use of
    the funds to ensure that they reach the intended beneficiaries. In
    addition, the government announced that it would not draw on the Bank's
    funds until after the end of June.

        Senator McConnell. OK. Let me get my colleague, Senator
    Leahy, in here. I know he is still managing a bill on the
    floor. Why do not you go ahead, Pat.

                 Opening statement of Senator Patrick J. Leahy

        Senator Leahy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for
    coming in late, but Senator Hatch and I are managing, or trying
    to manage, the juvenile justice bill. This issue has taken long
    enough that anybody who was a juvenile at the start of that
    bill will probably be ready for our senior crime bill at the
    end of this process. [Laughter.]
        But I wanted to make this appearance especially, Mr.
    Secretary, to praise you. I will try to praise you enough so I
    do not totally embarrass you, and then put the rest in the
    record. But I am sure that history is going to say that you,
    more than any other person, prevented the Asian financial
    crisis, as bad as it was, from becoming a global financial
    meltdown. A lot of us expected this to be a lot worse in this
    hemisphere. I think without you at Treasury, it would have
    been. You have been a godsend to the administration and to the
    country.
        People come and go in all administrations. Nobody is
    indispensable. I know there is a lot of very good men and women
    working behind the scenes in your Department. But you
    particularly have stood out in my 25 years that I have been in
    the Senate. Your experience, your confidence, your calming
    influence, it has reassured us here on the Hill. It has
    reassured the public and the world during some very difficult
    times.
        I know that you have made significant personal sacrifices
    in being there, not the least of which is having to commute
    back and forth to where your family is. But when we speak of
    public service, you epitomize the best of it. The country
    benefited by it. I believe the world did.
        Larry Summers said you are going to be a hard act to
    follow, but I also know Larry. I know what a superb person he
    is. I have great confidence in his ability, and I look forward
    to a very rapid confirmation of him.
        With all of the key issues we have to discuss, I do not
    think anything is as controversial as it was last year with the
    IMF quota increase. But we met our commitments to the IMF. We
    have paid our arrears to IBA. I do not want us to get behind,
    but we have some problems--both Senator McConnell and I have
    had some problems with the Bank and the Fund. I support the
    institutions, but we do have some performance things, and we
    want to discuss that at some point.
        We need to clear up our arrears to the Asian Development
    Bank. I am confident that we are going to fully fund the
    European Development Bank. The head of that is a person who
    gives me great confidence that our funds will be wisely used.
        The Global Environmental Facility continues to be caught up
    in, I think, an unnecessary debate over Kyoto. The GEF is every
    bit in our Nation's interest. To the extent that it is working
    on global warming, it supports efforts in the developing
    countries to do more to control their pollutants, that benefits
    everybody in this room, but also around the world. I do not
    know why anybody would oppose it. It is also working to reduce
    ocean pollution, to protect biodiversity. That is not either a
    Democrat or a Republican issue, that is all of us. They are
    desperately needed.
        You have requested $120 million for debt reduction. The
    poorest countries desperately need that. I do not think we are
    going to be able to meet that request within our budget
    allocation, only because it is a lot lower than it was last
    year.
        I hope, Mr. Chairman, we might end up with a revised
    allocation. Because this is one area where I would like to see
    us do more.
        I will put most of my questions in the record, Mr.
    Chairman.
        I raised concerns about the treatment of women employees at
    the World Bank back in 1992. For years, my concerns were
    ignored. In fact, the Bank's lawyers defended the Bank's
    grievance procedures even when it was obvious to everybody else
    they were unfair.
        Last year, the Bank asked a retired U.S. Federal judge to
    review the grievance procedures. I compliment them for doing
    that, but I note that the judge found that the procedure is a
    lot worse than I had thought--at least according to her report.

                               prepared statement

        Since then, the Bank has begun to make changes. Senator
    McConnell and I asked the GAO to look at the Bank's reform
    plans. That report came out last week. It said the procedures
    were ineffective in addressing complaints of bias and
    harassment, and, quote, ineffective at holding managers
    accountable for mistreating subordinates. Then we hear similar
    things about the IMF.
        I would hope, Mr. Secretary, that there are those in your
    Department who are looking at both of these issues. With that,
    I will hush. As I said, the rest of my questions I will put in
    the record.
        [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of Senator Patrick Leahy
        I want to welcome Secretary Rubin, who I suspect history will
    credit for doing more than anyone to keep the Asian financial crisis,
    as bad as it was, from becoming a global financial meltdown.
        There were a lot of us who expected the repercussions to be a lot
    worse in this hemisphere, and I think they would have if Secretary
    Rubin not been there.
        Bob, you have been a godsend to this administration, and to the
    country. I know that none of us is indispensible and there are a lot of
    people working behind the scenes. But your experience, your confidence,
    your calming influence--it has reassured us, the public, and the world
    during some difficult years.
        Larry Summers put it best when he said you are ``a hard act to
    follow,'' but I also know that he is up to the task.
        Mr. Chairman, we have several key issues to discuss, but
    fortunately nothing as controversial as last year's IMF quota increase.
        Last year we met our commitments to the IMF and paid our arrears to
    IDA. We do not want to get behind again. However, neither are we
    completely satisfied with the performance of the Bank and the Fund. As
    much as I support these institutions, I have real concerns about their
    performance and policies, which I want to discuss.
        We need to clear up our arrears to the Asian Development Bank.
        I am confident that we will fully fund the European Development
    Bank, whose President is the kind of person who gives me great
    confidence that our funds will be wisely used.
        The Global Environment Facility continues to be caught up in a
    debate over Kyoto, which makes absolutely no sense. The GEF is every
    bit in our nation's interest, and to the extent that it is working on
    global warming it supports efforts in the developing countries to do
    more to control their pollutants. Why anyone would oppose that is
    beyond me.
        The GEF also works to reduce ocean pollution, protect biodiversity
    --these are not Democratic or Republican programs. They are desperately
    needed.
        You have requested $120 million for debt reduction. This, more than
    anything, is what the poorest countries need. But it will be impossible
    for us to come up with that much money within our budget allocation,
    which is far lower than last year.
        My view right now is that if do not get a revised allocation, we
    should at least provide as much as we can for each component of your
    debt reduction request.
        With that, Mr. Chairman, I will wait my turn to ask questions.

        Secretary Rubin. Would you like me to respond to the last?
        Senator Leahy. Yes, would you, please.
        Secretary Rubin. Actually, I am not sure whether this is an
    IMF problem or the World Bank. But I know, in the World Bank,
    they put in place new grievance procedures. I think the
    question now is how they are going to work. I can assure you
    there are people at our place, at Treasury, who are very
    concerned with the issues at the World Bank which you have
    raised. I think now it is a question of seeing how these new
    grievance procedures work and whether they are effective or
    not.
        We have also discussed the new grievance procedures with
    Jim Wolfensohn as recently as yesterday. He has professed great
    commitment to try to make sure these things work out correctly.
        Senator Leahy. I have talked with Mr. Wolfensohn, too, on
    that. I know that he is concerned. It is a large organization
    that has followed almost a glacial movement in this area in the
    past. It is going to require a fair amount of effort and I
    think some public scrutiny.
        Secretary Rubin. Well, my guess would be that with you and
    your committee being focused on it and with their being focused
    on your committee because of their funding, I suspect you have
    a pretty effective means for getting their attention, but that
    would just be a guess.
        Senator Leahy. The IMF is considering 5 million to 10
    million ounces of its gold reserves to pay for debt relief for
    the poorest countries. Britain, I saw in the paper the other
    day, talked about--I think Britain is talking about large gold
    sales. Is this a wise thing to do?
        Secretary Rubin. I think it is, Senator. What would happen
    is that the gold, which is a non-interest, non-income yielding
    asset, would be converted into something that is equally--I
    mean in terms of its corpus--is risk free, for example, U.S.
    Treasury bills or something of that sort--the corpus--would be
    kept within the IMF. But instead of having no yield, you would
    have a yield. It is actually a subject I used to know a fair
    bit about. I do not trade it anymore because it is not quite
    appropriate. [Laughter.]
        Senator Leahy. You could just sit down there at Fort Knox.
    [Laughter.]
        Secretary Rubin. I think, in this job, I should not do
    that. But I do think 5 million or 10 million ounces, even at
    today's demonetized market flow, is not something that--I mean
    spread over a couple of years, which I believe is the IMF's
    intent--should not have a material impact on the price of gold.
    Yes, I think it is a very wise thing to do.
        Senator Leahy. Do we have any public or private debt?
        Secretary Rubin. I do not know what they would do with the
    proceeds. To the best of my knowledge, no decision has been
    made on that. But I think I would say with some confidence that
    it would be put in something that does not involve a credit
    risk.
        Senator Leahy. My last question: Were you alarmed by the
    rise of the CPI last month?
        Secretary Rubin. The answer to that question is no. I think
    we have always got to be watchful for inflation. And that is
    something we have been, even when inflation remained very low.
    But I think that you cannot be--at least I am not--particularly
    affected by month-to-month or quarter-to-quarter figures. I
    think what you really have to do is get a sense of the way
    things are going in the economy. If you look at the excess
    capacity around the world and you look at productivity gains
    taking place in this country and everything else, particularly
    when you have discussions with CEO's of companies that are
    large-scale operations, there is very little pricing power in
    the American business today, as you know.
        It seems to me that the most likely scenario continues to
    be low inflation and solid growth, normal ups and downs, and
    obviously subject to whatever risk may exist in the system.
        Senator Leahy. Thank you.
        I got a message to go back to the floor and see our
    juvenile to senior crime bill. But, Bob, I hope you know how
    much I do appreciate all you have done.
        Secretary Rubin. I appreciate your comments.
        Senator Leahy. The country has benefited by that.
        Secretary Rubin. Thank you very much.
        Senator McConnell. Mr. Secretary, I am going to have a few
    questions, which your staff can respond to in writing, on
    Africa, the Africa debt situation.
        I, too, want to congratulate you on your public service. I
    hope we will see you from time to time in the future. We wish
    you the very best.

                         Additional Committee questions

        Thank you very much. There will be some additional
    questions which will be submitted for your response in the
    record.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick J. Leahy
                        north american development bank
        Question. One of the main purposes of the North American
    Development Bank is to address environmental problems in the U.S.-
    Mexican border area. There is a lead smelter in the Mexican city of
    Torreon that has poisoned the air, soil and water and caused terrible
    health problems for the people living there.
        The Mexican Government, under pressure has finally said it will do
    something about it, but I doubt it will be enough. Torreon is about 250
    miles from the Texas border. Is this something the NADBank could get
    involved in?
        Answer. While the Administration and the NADBank management are
    well aware of the problem, the lead smelter in Torreon is outside the
    geographic jurisdiction of the NADBank. The Bank was established in
    fiscal year 1995 and funded jointly by the U.S. and Mexico to provide
    financing (loans, guaranties, and grants) for projects in water,
    wastewater, and solid waste treatment within 100 km of either side of
    the border. Torreon is clearly outside of that mandate.
      --We understand, however, that the U.S. Environmental Protection
            Agency, at the request of Mexican government authorities, has
            provided information on the environmental health impacts of
            lead contamination and information regarding U.S. experience
            with similar lead clean-up activities.
      --More generally, we understand that EPA and DOE have offered their
            informal assistance in the past to the Mexican efforts to
            develop programs for remediation of lead pollution and the
            development of supporting regulatory framework.
                          middle east development bank
        Question. Your budget request does not include a contribution to
    the Middle East Bank. I agree that we can not afford this new back,
    since we are having a hard enough time meeting our financial
    commitments to the banks we already have.
        But one of the reasons given for the Middle East Bank was to
    support cross-border infrastructure projects, some of which would have
    benefited the Palestinians. Without the Middle East Bank, can't the
    World Bank support these types of projects?
        Answer. The World Bank is not prevented from undertaking trans-
    border projects. However, these require a sovereign guarantee. This
    presents a serious legal and practical obstacle for the Bank in that
    the West Bank and Gaza is not a member country and is unable to provide
    such a guarantee.
        The Trust Fund for Gaza and the West Bank has enabled the Bank to
    sidestep some of the legal and practical constraints related to the
    Palestinian political situation. The Bank has allocated $320 million
    from IBRD net income for the Trust Fund. There have been 16 Trust Fund
    financed operations totaling $270 million; with a cofinancing ratio of
    nearly $2 of other funds for every $1 of Trust Fund resources.
        While no cross-border operations have been funded by the Trust
    Fund, the Fund has helped to finance a broad range of other development
    activities designed to improve the economic situation of the
    Palestinians by strengthening public, private and civil capacity, and
    by rehabilitating basic infrastructure. Particular stress has been
    placed on health, education, and water supply and sanitation.
                                     tibet
        Question. According to an April 28th article in the Washington
    Post, the World Bank is considering financing a proposal that would aid
    poor Chinese farmers by resettling them further west into Tibet--
    diluting further the proportion of Tibetans in the area. On June 8th,
    the Bank's board of directors is scheduled to vote on this loan. I am
    concerned about the potential impact of this project on the Tibetan
    people, who are already chafing under Chinese rule.
        Are you aware of this project and does the administration plan to
    oppose it?
        Answer: We were aware of and highly concerned about this project,
    and discussed it in a series of internal USG meetings and technical
    briefings with World Bank staff. The project came to the World Bank
    Board on June 22. The U.S. opposed the project for reasons articulated
    by the U.S. Executive Director. A copy of that statement follows:
     statement by jan piercy on china: western poverty reduction project,
                                 june 24, 1999
        1. This project raises for us a series of fundamentally important
    concerns about the process by which we have arrived where we are today.
    The issues go well beyond the specifics of a particular project for a
    particular borrower, although these clearly demand close scrutiny.
    Their satisfactory resolution--inside this institution, and among the
    Bank and its shareholders--is of vital importance to the continuing
    viability and effectiveness of the Bank.
        2. If fully implemented, this project will affect 1.7 million
    people and resettle close to 60,000, leading to extensive
    infrastructure investments, including a 40 meter dam, extensive road
    building and upgrading, and major irrigation works.
        3. By any reading of the Bank's own guidelines, this is a Category
    A project. Perhaps more importantly, by any test of reasonableness,
    this is a Category A project. It is true that meeting the resulting
    higher standards of performance, analysis, and disclosure takes some
    additional time and perhaps costs some additional money. The standards
    exist, however, because the actions they require are a prerequisite to
    achieving durable development as demonstrated time and again by this
    institution's own analysis and evaluations.
        4. In this regard, we understand that a QAG review on the Bank's
    compliance with safeguard policies in China is underway. We would
    appreciate management comment on the findings of this review, which may
    raise systemic issues, and expect that the conclusions will be reported
    to the Board on completion.
        5. Whether the project is large or small, whether the borrower is
    large or small, our view is that the agreed standards must be met:
        Comprehensiveness of Documentation.--Because the project was mis-
    classified as a Category B, neither the Bank nor the borrower prepared
    a full environmental assessment. Thus the full scope of the potential
    environmental and social impacts of a clearly major project have not
    been fully assessed. Nor did either the Bank or the borrower perform
    the full assessment of alternatives that is a required component of an
    environmental assessment. This deprives the affected people, the
    shareholders, and the Bank itself of the basis for serious
    consideration of whether the best choices have been made. In
    particular, it deprives affected people of an important tool for more
    effective consultations.
        Distribution of documents.--Bank guidelines specifically require
    local availability of environmental analysis before project appraisal,
    with simultaneous availability at the Bank's headquarters. This did not
    occur. Indeed, the documents were not made available here in Washington
    until June 4.
        Indigenous People.--The Bank's operational policy on Indigenous
    People contains a full range of analytical and consultation
    requirements specifically designed to ensure that the particular
    challenges and concerns of indigenous populations are integrated fully
    and effectively into all elements of the project design process. It is
    plain that this project is fundamentally about indigenous people. The
    Bank's own documents confirm that the project will have a significant
    impact on the indigenous population in this Mongolian-Tibetan
    Autonomous Prefecture, with potentially permanent implications for
    their geographical distributions and relative densities, their economic
    prospects, and their social and cultural cohesion. The Bank's claim
    that the project document itself constitutes an indigenous peoples
    development plan is not credible. It does a great disservice to the
    very people whose lives this operation is supposed to improve, it
    ignores the very clear expectations of many of the Bank's shareholders,
    and it is directly contrary to the basic intent of the policy.
        6. These are all reasonable standards. They constitute official
    Bank policy. And they apply to all borrowers. If these standards have
    not been met, as is the case today, we are not prepared to give our
    support. This is the basis on which our vote is no on this proposed
    loan.
        7. There are three other issues that deserve comment: the Bank's
    response to some of the substantive issues that have been raised; the
    response of the borrower; and, deficiencies in the process itself.
        On the former, there is much that is troubling and that we should
    examine in the weeks ahead:
      --On some issues of wide concern to many shareholders, the Bank's
            initial response was to provide questionable legal opinions
            rather than to engage seriously in seeking real solutions.
      --We have been told that our concerns were raised too late in the
            process to make adjustments. Yet those concerns were raised as
            quickly as the flow of information would allow. The real issue
            here is a wholly inadequate flow of project documents to the
            shareholders that effectively ruled out constructive engagement
            at an early enough point to make a difference.
      --Most broadly, we need to reflect very carefully on what this
            episode says about the balance the Bank has struck between
            responsiveness to a single borrower focussed on a single
            lending program and responsiveness to a wider group of
            shareholders whose concerns go well beyond that. A set of
            choices has been made with potentially far-reaching
            implications for this institution without the apparent
            willingness of all parties to see them in their larger context
            and act on that recognition.
        We should all reflect on the response of the Bank's largest
    borrower to the substantive concerns that many shareholders have about
    this project:
      --There was no willingness to reconsider one component of the
            proposed project.
      --We were told that a borrower's use of IDA funding is an issue for
            it and the Bank alone. Direct engagement of IDA donor countries
            on substantive issues they regard as fundamentally important--
            such as full compliance with bank policies--was said to
            constitute illegitimate interference in internal affairs.
        Finally, we should give some serious thought to improvements that
    might be made in the process itself.
      --I recall the President's mention, over a year ago, of instituting
            an informal--early warning system--in management to alert him
            to potentially sensitive projects: what has happened to this
            process?
      --Had we had something like this, we would not have been blindsided,
            with huge diversion of management and Board time in the
            critical final month of the fiscal year.
                          global environment facility
        Question. I am concerned about the reputation of the GEF in
    Congress. Some Members have blocked funding for it because they say it
    is a ``backdoor'' way to implement the Kyoto Protocol, which the U.S.
    is not a party to.
        The fact is, for years the GEF has supported efforts by developing
    countries to reduce their emissions of ozone destroying pollutants. How
    do you respond to the arguments that have been made against the GEF?
        How does the GEF work? What happens to our contribution? Who
    implements GEF programs? Why do we need the GEF? Do other agencies or
    organizations do what the GEF does?
        Answer. The Administration shares the concern that some members of
    Congress misunderstand the GEF's mission, operations, and track record.
    We welcome the opportunity to address some continuing concerns.
        The GEF was created in 1991, before any climate convention or
    protocol existed, to specialize in trans-border environment problems,
    of which climate is only one. In addition to climate change, GEF
    funding is focused on international water pollution and overfishing;
    better forestry, wildlife management, and biological diversity
    conservation; and phasing out use of ozone-depleting chemicals (in
    Eastern Europe, to complement Montreal Protocol Fund work in developing
    countries). The clean energy portion of its portfolio--its ``climate
    change focal area''--accounts for about 38.8 percent of its financial
    commitments (about 12.4 percent of the projects in its portfolio). No
    other multilateral development institution is dedicated to protecting
    global resources, and no other institution has anywhere near the
    capacity to tackle these problems. This is especially true for
    biodiversity conservation and international waters cleanup, for which
    GEF implements up to 40 percent of projects worldwide.
        The 1992 Climate Convention (the ``1992 Convention'') provided that
    there should be a ``financial mechanism'' to: (1) help developing
    countries evaluate, quantify, and report publicly on their greenhouse
    gas emissions; and (2) make investments in cleaner development in
    developing countries. More than three years before conclusion of the
    Kyoto Protocol, we chose the GEF as the institution to run the
    financial mechanism of the Climate Convention, in part to avoid
    creating new institutions. The GEF was by far the best existing
    institution for the job. By 1994, donors had concluded a first GEF
    replenishment that extensively restructured the GEF and improved its
    operational effectiveness. This restructuring also cemented a
    governance structure in which donors exercise much more power than in
    the 1992 Convention or in any standard ``UN-configured'' institution.
    The new replenishment, agreed in 1998, builds on first replenishment
    reforms with further measures to increase GEF efficiency and
    effectiveness.
    GEF operations and funding
        The GEF focuses on innovative, cost-effective and generally small
    projects that can be duplicated elsewhere with financing from non-GEF
    sources. Since its pilot phase beginning in 1991, the GEF has designed
    and initiated over 500 projects in 119 countries that are now being
    implemented by developing countries with the help of three agencies--
    the World Bank, the UN Development Program, and the UN Environment
    Program.
        From its core donor funding, GEF has committed about $2.5 billion
    to date, leveraging well over $5 billion from other sources. Donor
    funds only cover the portion of projects that produces global
    environmental benefits, while recipients must arrange funding for
    activities with mainly local benefits. The U.S. has limited its share
    of GEF's core fund to under 21 percent, equaling $430 million over four
    years. GEF's cofinanciers include the developing countries themselves,
    bilateral aid agencies, the GEF's three implementing agencies and other
    multilateral institutions, private sector investors, and non-
    governmental organizations. Leveraging for clean energy projects is
    often as high as $5 from other sources for every GEF dollar.
        GEF operations take two forms: (1) technical assistance to help
    developing countries frame more environmentally sound policies in key
    sectors such as energy production and land management; and (2) direct
    investments to demonstrate innovative technology projects, such as
    rural solar power, that countries then can copy on a larger scale.
    No projects that are Kyoto-specific
        The GEF predates both the Kyoto Protocol and the 1992 Convention,
    and the Protocol places no new obligations on the GEF. With regard to
    development finance, the Protocol is related to the GEF through the
    Protocol's umbrella, the 1992 Convention, since the GEF acts as the
    financial mechanism for the Convention. The Protocol simply references
    and underscores existing 1992 Convention agreements on financial
    assistance for developing countries:
      --Supporting developing country reporting requirements under the 1992
            Convention; and
      --Providing the extra cost over normal development costs of reducing
            greenhouse gas emissions in energy or other projects. For
            example, the GEF covers only the incremental cost of a clean
            wind power plant relative to a regular oil-fired plant of
            identical capacity.
        The country reports provide detailed analysis of countries'
    greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and sources (power plants, etc.), their
    GHG ``sinks'' (forests, etc.), and policies and programs that affect
    GHG emissions (energy pricing policies, etc.). This helps identify the
    highest emission/sequestration sectors and the best opportunities to
    cut emissions.
        The four categories of project financing include promoting
    efficiency and conservation, promoting renewable energy, promoting
    clean fossil-fuel combustion, and lowering long-term cost of clean
    technologies. Project development is usually combined with capacity-
    building for good policies and effective institutions. These programs
    make sense on their own terms and are all initiatives the U.S. has been
    pursuing domestically for years. None of these activities are directed
    by the Kyoto Protocol.
                   debt relief for tropical forest countries
        Question. You are requesting $50 million to support debt relief for
    countries with tropical forests. Whose debt would we be forgiving (U.S.
    Government? Other Governments? Private?), and can you explain how by
    forgiving Ecuador's or some other country's debt, we conserve their
    rainforests?
        Which countries would benefit? Who would decide how the local funds
    would be used for conservation programs? How much difference would it
    actually make--how much local currency would be generated this way to
    protect tropical forests, how much forest would be protected, and how
    ``protected'' would those forests actually be?
        I think this has a lot of potential. It could also end up as
    another way for the wrong people to spend public money for the wrong
    purposes. How can we be sure that non-governmental conservation
    organizations have a real say over the use of the funds?
        Answer. We would use the $50 million to reduce the official,
    concessional debts (PL-480 and USAID) owed to the United States
    Government by countries which meet the eligibility criteria specified
    in the Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998. This Act, based on the
    original Enterprise for the Americas Initiative (EAI), requires local
    currency to be generated to conserve rainforests in exchange for debt
    reduction.
        Eligible countries have three ways to treat their outstanding
    sovereign debt: first, through buybacks, where the country would
    contribute up to 40 percent of the repurchase price of the debt to a
    local fund to support rainforest projects; second, through swaps, where
    a third party, generally an NGO, would buy the debt from the USG and
    exchange the debt certificate for local currency at a premium over the
    purchase price; and third, debt reduction, where the USG would reduce a
    portion of the country's debt and will permit the country to pay the
    interest on the remaining debt in local currency equivalent to fund
    rainforest projects. In this latter case, the principal will be repaid
    in dollars to the U.S. Treasury.
        As an illustration of the first option, a country would buy back
    its outstanding, eligible debt of about $100 million at 50 cents on the
    dollar. It contributes 40 percent of the purchase price, 20 cents, in
    local currency to the rainforest projects. So far, Peru and Ecuador
    have officially expressed an interest in participating in the program,
    while Indonesia, Costa Rica, and Brazil have informally discussed
    participation. Preliminary estimates suggest that we could generate
    over $100 million in local currency if we treated these countries'
    eligible debt. Of course, how much local currency will be generated
    will depend on the amount of outstanding debt treated under this
    program.
                                     ______

               Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
                 ending the debt cycle of the poorest countries
        Question. For too long, the world's poorest developing countries
    have been caught in cycles of indebtedness. International lending has
    not yet produced sustained, rapid economic growth to help alleviate
    poverty and bring these countries into the world economy. President
    Clinton and you have led admirable efforts to reduce the indebtedness
    of the poorest countries.
        On the basis of your substantial experience, what recommendations
    would you make to break the cycle of poverty and debt among the poorest
    countries in Africa and elsewhere, contribute to private sector growth,
    and bring them into the global economy?
        Answer. We think that sound economic policies and good governance
    backed by financial assistance and significant debt forgiveness can
    help the poorest, most heavily indebted countries create the basis for
    long-term economic growth. While the last few decades have witnessed
    substantial improvements in living standards in most of the developing
    world, poverty remains unacceptably high. There are a number of low-
    income countries where continued high debt and debt service burdens
    place reform efforts and social development at risk. A recent study by
    the IMF of 10 low-income developing countries showed that one of the
    main factors behind the buildup of debt was a lack of sustained strong
    macroeconomic policies and reforms or, in other words, ``a stop and go
    policy implementation.'' Civil war and social strife also were
    important factors, particularly in Africa.
        Mozambique is a good example of how sustained reform has led to
    significant acceleration of economic growth and increased integration
    into the global economy. Mozambique is one of the strongest economic
    reformers in Sub-Saharan Africa. The government turned its back on an
    inefficient statist economy and made impressive progress in setting up
    a market economy. After 16 years of civil war, democratic elections
    were held in 1994 and macroeconomic stability has been restored. After
    registering average real GDP growth of about 6.7 percent for 10 years
    through 1996 (with population growth of about 3 percent annually over
    the same period), the growth rate accelerated to an impressive 11.3
    percent growth in 1997, 11.8 percent in 1998 and a projected 10 percent
    in 1999. These accelerated growth rates, combined with debt forgiveness
    available to the strongest performers, have the effect of bringing
    Mozambique's debt ratios down to manageable levels while making the
    country more attractive to private lenders and investors. Also, we know
    that financial assistance, when provided into a good policy
    environment, does produce growth, does reduce poverty and does improve
    social indicators.
                             proliferation of mdbs
        Question. Mr. Secretary, in recent years, well-intentioned efforts
    to promote economic growth in particular regions and to promote certain
    priorities such as sustainable development have led to the creation of
    new multilateral development banks. What are the consequences of this
    proliferation of institutions? Does the Global Environment Facility,
    which directs funds to particular and essential purpose but relies on
    the personnel of the World Bank, provide a model for potential
    consolidation of institutions?
        Answer. Creation of new institutions, such as EBRD and NADBank,
    strengthens the system of multilateral development institutions. These
    new banks are explicitly designed to focus on activities to meet
    demonstrable investment needs, either in specific regions or with
    respect to specific sectors. The new institutions are mandated to
    complement, not duplicate, the activities of existing multilateral
    development banks (MDBs). The World Bank continues to take the lead on
    broad policy reform programs (structural adjustment). Regional
    institutions to fill particular niches of expertise.
        The EBRD was established in 1991 to promote the development of free
    market economies in Europe committed to multiparty democracy. To that
    end, the EBRD focuses on private sector-led development, and the
    development of small, medium and micro-enterprises, as well as strong
    financial institutions and local capital markets.
        The NADBank was established in 1993 to finance environmental
    infrastructure projects along the U.S./Mexico border, as well as
    community adjustment and investment in both countries.
        The GEF is the primary multilateral mechanism to help developing
    countries take on responsibility for addressing a variety of
    environmental problems that have global implications. It is the only
    organization that can combine the requisite levels of project
    development expertise, institutional relationships, and finance. The
    GEF is a lean, transparent DC-based organization. The GEF's 32 member
    Secretariat works with small GEF units at the three implementing
    agencies. These agencies are: the World Bank, which manages
    demonstration investment projects; the United Nations Development
    Program, which runs capacity building programs, and United Nations
    Environment Program, which provides scientific and information systems
    related technical assistance. This organizational structure improves
    collaboration and helps keep administrative costs down.
                management reform at world bank and other (mdbs)
        Question. Mr. Secretary, I know you have made a concerted effort to
    reduce overhead costs of the World Bank and other international
    financial institutions. What progress have you made, and what remains
    to be done? What can we do to improve effective use of limited
    resources?
        Answer. The United States has obtained significant benefits at the
    MDBs--high leverage, major policy impact, and global reach--at a
    substantially lower budgetary cost. Since the mid-1990s, we have
    negotiated down new U.S. financial commitments to the MDBs by
    approximately 37 percent, reducing our annual appropriation need from
    about $1.9B to the current level of $1.2B. With contributions from 180
    other shareholders, and the capacity to tap global capital markets, the
    MDBs are able to mobilize about $40 for economic development
    investments for each dollar we directly contribute. In 1998, the U.S.
    provided $1.4B and the MDBs made commitments of $57.1B. Simultaneously,
    we have obtained major policy reforms in the institutions, ensured
    their continued focus on issues of priority to the United States and
    American taxpayers, and maintained U.S. voting shares and influence.
        In addition the United States has pressed the institutions,
    especially the concessional facilities such as IDA and the African
    Development Fund, to create a stronger linkage between new lending and
    borrower performance, including explicit consideration of good
    governance and efforts to combat corruption. The institutions are
    giving greater scrutiny to the level and composition of military
    spending in borrowing countries. Improved evaluation mechanisms also
    are helping improve the quality of operations. All of the efforts help
    ensure that the resources provided by the U.S. and other members will
    be put to the most effective use.
        The MDBs are also placing greater emphasis on catalyzing private
    sector resources by focussing on market-building reforms, eliminating
    restrictive trade and investment practices, restructuring the financial
    sector and privatizing state-owned firms. The institutions are
    developing new instruments, such as guarantees, to strengthen their
    partnership with the private sector.
        The case for continued U.S. participation in the MDBs, is as strong
    and compelling as ever. Last year the MDBs responded rapidly to
    financial market turmoil in Asia, Russia and Latin America with
    programs and assistance that were contingent upon specific policy
    conditionality tailored to address the underlying problems that made
    these countries vulnerable. These programs and the policy adjustments
    that underpin them have been helping to restore economic stability,
    promote deep financial and economic policy reforms, and strengthen
    social safety nets to cushion the impact of the crisis on the most
    vulnerable. Returning these regions to a path of sustained, and
    sustainably financed, growth will pay commercial and security dividends
    to Americans for years to come.
        More broadly the MDBs provide a powerful and increasingly effective
    instrument for U.S. global leadership at a time when developing and
    transition country economic issues have unprecedented implications for
    American interests. With their extensive financial resources, technical
    expertise, multilateral composition, and contribution-based voting
    rules, the MDBs are uniquely well placed to promote the basic economic
    investments and policy reforms needed to achieve an enduring reduction
    of poverty and to support market-driven democratization around the
    globe. Aggressive U.S. advocacy on a wide range of bipartisan issues
    over the last decade has produced major operational and policy
    improvements across the MDBs, cementing our leadership on global
    economic development policy while at the same time substantially
    reducing the budgetary costs of our participation. The result is an
    institutional system able to address, directly and cost-effectively,
    priority U.S. policy objectives on issues of global importance, as well
    as regional and country-specific challenges where substantial U.S.
    interests are directly at stake.
      --Around the world there are three billion people who still live on
            less than $2 per day, two billion who are without regular
            access to either sanitation or reliable power, and one and one
            half billion who do not have regular access to clean water. The
            MDB system remains the world's largest provider of concessional
            funding for critically needed poverty reduction investments in
            the world's poorest countries, such as for primary health and
            education (especially for girls), disease control, basic
            sanitation, and power.
      --After major natural disasters, such as Hurricane Mitch and flooding
            in Bangladesh, the MDBs help meet reconstruction and
            development needs through expanded and expedited lending and
            effective coordination of the broader donor community.
      --The MDBs are playing an important role in building peace and open
            market economies and in fostering democracy and civil society
            around the world. Their work includes basic investments in
            public services in the West Bank and Gaza; economic
            reconstruction in Bosnia-Herzegovina; anti-corruption and good
            governance programs in Sub-Saharan Africa; and market-building
            reforms in what formerly were the centrally-planned economies
            of Europe and Asia.
                    aid for integration of southeast europe
        Question. Mr. Secretary, the President has requested and Congress
    will soon provide substantial supplemental funding for operations to
    counter the Milosevic's regime campaign of terror in Kosova and help
    the refugees and otherwise deal with its consequences. Military
    conflict often costs more than efforts to promote reconciliation and
    avoid or resolve conflicts peacefully. The Balkan region remains rife
    with potential conflicts, not least because economic ties between
    countries in the region have not been strengthened.
        Would you agree that the international financial institutions
    should mount a renewed and rapid effort to develop transportation and
    communications and energy infrastructure in Southeast Europe to help
    ensure a better, common future for people in this troubled region?
        I would suggest, for example, rapid reconstruction of the East-West
    road and rail corridor linking Albania, Macedonia and Bulgaria;
    constructing a new road to link central Albania with the border with
    Kosova near Kukes; and construction of a second bridge over the Danube
    linking Romania and Bulgaria so goods can move around Serbia.
        Answer. I fully agree that it is important for the multilateral
    donor community, including the U.S., to provide assistance to the
    countries in the Balkans region to address the economic consequences of
    the Kosova conflict and to attempt to ensure greater long-term
    stability and prosperity for that troubled region. Such assistance must
    be governed by a solid, comprehensive needs assessment and provided in
    ways that promote further economic and political reform, allocate
    scarce resources efficiently, and avoid duplication of efforts.
        Consequently, it is critical that any efforts to undertake regional
    initiatives, such as the ones you have described, be based on sound
    economic analysis, be consistent with overall development strategies
    that will be formulated in the World Bank/EC-led donor coordination
    process, and have the unequivocal support of the countries that are to
    benefit directly from those initiatives. I note that the Southeast
    European Cooperative Initiative (SECI) was established in December 1996
    to promote regional economic and environmental cooperation among the
    countries in the region, and to facilitate their integration into
    European structures. In addition, the Administration has announced its
    Southeast Europe Initiative, which includes a focus on identifying
    particular needs in connection with regional economic integration,
    including infrastructure and transportation projects. Finally, the U.S.
    government is participating in the Stability Pact for South Europe,
    which is designed to promote stability, prosperity, and in tegration
    for that region.
                           treasury advisers program
        Question. Mr. Secretary, I understand your Department runs the
    Treasury Advisors program to assist transition and developing countries
    with macroeconomic and other policy and programmatic recommendations.
    However, I am told most advisors are contractors rather than Treasury
    employees, and that it costs about half a million dollars a year to
    field each of these advisers in foreign capitals. Is this a cost-
    effective program? How can we encourage more U.S. government employees
    who have the relevant expertise to spend a year or two advising a
    foreign government in their area of expertise?
        Answer. Treasury's Office of Technical Assistance has been helping
    governments in Central Europe and the Former Soviet Union since the
    early 1990's. It is a program that brings together experienced
    professionals with outstanding expertise in a given area and puts them
    to work helping host countries implement many of the structural changes
    which Treasury advocates in order for them to develop the institutional
    framework for a market economy to flourish. Treasury strongly endorses
    this program because it works, and the feedback we receive from finance
    ministers and other senior officials in recipient countries convinces
    me that they place great value on the work of our advisors. The success
    of this program is such that it has recently received funding to expand
    its operations on a selective basis to countries in Latin America,
    Africa, and Southeast Asia.
        Although funding for Treasury's technical assistance program is
    based on a ``per advisor'' cost, this statistic is somewhat misleading.
    When operating in a given country, Treasury advisors have a broad array
    of resources that they can call upon. Most important in this regard are
    a wide range of technical specialists, who are available to work on a
    short-term basis, to supplement the capabilities of the resident
    advisor. The cost of these supplemental resources is rolled into the
    charge for a single advisor.
        A large number of items make up the cost of fielding a Treasury
    advisor, including:
      --Salary, benefits, housing, utilities, and transportation;
      --Translators, assistants, computer equipment, and all other costs of
            maintaining an office overseas; and
      --Some projects require additional in-country costs, for example,
            hiring legal counsel in the host country when assisting with
            the drafting of new tax laws. These costs can be substantial
            and increase ``per advisor'' costs for the entire program.
        The Treasury technical assistance program operates at the highest
    levels of a host government. Our advisors have formerly been senior
    level executives and command higher salaries than those paid in an
    average foreign aid program. We monitor expenses carefully and others,
    including the Treasury Inspector General, State Department Inspector
    General, and the GAO, have studied the costs of this program. Their
    conclusions are that the program costs the same or marginally more than
    comparable foreign aid programs. However, when these costs are weighed
    against the accomplishments of this program, Treasury considers it
    highly cost-effective.
        In terms of advisor selection, Treasury endeavors to choose the
    most qualified candidate for a particular job. We conduct a ``needs
    assessment'' for each mission to define the necessary skill base, and
    positions are filled based on an open recruitment policy. The
    flexibility provided by multiple contracting mechanisms is necessary to
    ensure that Treasury fields the best candidate available for an
    advisory position. We encourage candidates from different areas in the
    Federal Government to join this program, and we have advisors who work
    under Reimbursable Agreements, not only from Treasury, but from the
    IRS, the Census Bureau, Justice and the Commerce Department. Other
    advisors come to us from state governments and work under Inter-agency
    Personnel Agreements. However, the largest numbers of advisors work
    under Personal Services Contracts, which are used to employ people from
    the private sector or retired Federal employees.
        In terms of Washington-based staff, we employ a mix of career
    government service, term government service, and personal service
    contractors in the Treasury technical assistance program. This is based
    on the premise that funding for the program is subject to the
    ``sunset'' provisions of the SEED Act and the FSA. However, with the
    receipt of an independent appropriation from Congress, this structure
    may change in the future with Treasury likely to employ more civil
    servants on our program management staff.
                        gef offset in supplemental bill
        Question. The Supplemental Appropriations bill which will soon come
    to the full Senate from the Conference Committee includes certain
    offsets in foreign affairs funding. The bill will cut $25 million
    appropriated in fiscal year 1999 for the Global Environment Facility.
    What will be the impact of this reduction in the U.S. contribution to
    the GEF?
        Answer. The $25 million cut in funding for the GEF will have a
    negative impact on its ability to implement critical environmental
    programs. The GEF faces a funding shortfall of more than $250 million
    in the coming year, primarily because of U.S. arrears to both the first
    and second replenishments. Also, this rescission likely will delay
    payment on other pledges, since some other donors peg their
    contributions to our own payments.
        The funding situation is a particular concern since the GEF is the
    lead multilateral organization for helping developing countries take on
    greater responsibility for addressing environmental problems with
    global implications. For example, the GEF has greater role in
    preventing loss of biological diversity than any other organization
    worldwide. Moreover, each U.S. dollar leverages about $12 in co-
    financing from a combination of sources including other donors,
    developing countries themselves, bilateral and multilateral aid
    agencies, and the private sector.
        Therefore, failure by the United States to meet its financial
    commitments in full and on time can have a multiple contractionary
    effect on institutional operations.
        Regarding the second option, to date the USG has not used the swap
    mechanism. The USG has used the third option, however, under the EAI
    program.
        To address your concern regarding the use of funds, mechanisms have
    been established to ensure oversight by the host and U.S. governments,
    as well as the NGO community. For example, all projects over $100,000
    must be approved by the host government, the local board, and the
    Enterprise for the Americas Board, an oversight group composed of
    representatives from State, Treasury, USAID, Agriculture, and the NGO
    community.

                              subcommittee recess

        Senator McConnell. The subcommittee will stand in recess
    until 10:30 a.m., on Thursday, May 20, when we will receive
    testimony from Madeleine Albright, Secretary of State.
        [Whereupon, at 3:40 p.m., Wednesday, May 19, the
    subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 10:30 a.m.,
    Thursday, May 20.]

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 20, 1999

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met at 11:28 a.m., in room SD-192, Dirksen
    Senate Office Building, Hon. Mitch McConnell (chairman)
    presiding.
        Present: Senators McConnell and Specter.

                              DEPARTMENT OF STATE

                            Office of the Secretary

    STATEMENT OF HON. MADELEINE K. ALBRIGHT, SECRETARY OF
                STATE

                 opening statement of Senator Mitch Mc Connell

        Senator McConnell. This hearing of the Foreign Operations
    Subcommittee of Appropriations will come to order.
        We want to welcome the Secretary of State. Thank you for
    coming up. As you know, Madam Secretary, later today we expect
    to pass a substantial supplemental appropriations bill which
    will meet urgent needs in both Central America and Southeastern
    Europe. Total supplemental funding for foreign operations
    activities in these two regions is nearly $1.8 billion. For two
    regions, we are spending 30 percent more than the $1.1 billion
    appropriated for all global development assistance programs in
    the current fiscal year.
        During my tenure as chairman we have faced large
    supplemental requests virtually every year. This year's
    disproportionate increase tells me that there is something
    wrong in how we plan and program foreign assistance. We seem to
    be falling short in both areas. The most immediate example of
    the consequences of a lack of foresight and planning is Kosova.
        Late last year it was already obvious that conditions
    inside Kosova were deteriorating. Months of Serbian attacks had
    forced 400,000 people to flee their homes. When they were
    finally able to return, of course, winter had come. Most of
    these people found themselves desperately trying to provide a
    roof and warmth in one room of what was left of their homes.
    Food, medicine, and heat were in short supply throughout the
    province. Schools and clinics were closed, with doctors
    terrorized by Serb authorities and prevented from providing
    care.
        These shortfalls were repeatedly brought to the
    Department's attention, yet largely ignored. When the February
    emergency supplemental for Central America was submitted, I
    encouraged the Department to ask for an increase in aid to meet
    urgent resettlement needs of the 400,000 people displaced in
    Kosova and Montenegro last year. The request was not made.
    Eventually a request was submitted after hundreds of thousands
    of refugees poured over Albania and Macedonia's borders. That
    is also when the hand-wringing began that there were inadequate
    resources to meet the needs. If you had planned and moved in
    February to address the needs of the existing 400,000 displaced
    Kosovars, the administration would have had the resources
    available to cope with at least, at least the first wave of
    refugees who fled in March. Eventually you may have had to come
    back for more, but there would have been funds sufficient at
    least to bridge the gap with the first wave of refugees.
        There was little forward planning then and there seems to
    be little now to face the next challenge.
        The air war did not begin this humanitarian holocaust, as
    the administration has repeatedly said and accurately said. Nor
    will the crisis end when the last sortie returns to Aviano. In
    all likelihood, there will be more than one million refugees
    and displaced people well into the next year.
        Just as important as the immediate humanitarian needs,
    there are crushing economic and infrastructure problems
    resulting from this war which will have to be dealt with if we
    are to have any hope of restoring a durable stability to
    Europe.
        I see little planning to address those major long-term
    requirements. Your prepared testimony points out the
    President's request was prepared before the war began and urges
    us to work together to revise amounts needed to support a
    future peacekeeping capability. It makes no mention of the need
    to revise estimates of economic support we must offer if peace
    is to be sustained. In fact, you simply urge us to support the
    submitted $393 million request for Europe, which reflects a
    real reduction actually in regional support.
        Now, I have heard recovery costs may run as high as $5
    billion over several years, with the prospect of a U.S.
    contribution to those plans of 25 percent. Within a few weeks,
    we will begin the markup of the foreign operations bill. We are
    going to go early with the bill on the Senate side this year.
    So there is considerable urgency to defining our role and our
    responsibilities. Your current request cannot begin to cover
    the needs, even assuming the Europeans take the lead.
        Just as we defined our resource commitments after Camp
    David, I think we are clearly likely to have a long-term in-
    depth relationship with Southeast Europe like we have never had
    before in our effort to improve those countries and to secure
    peace in the wake of the conclusion of this Balkan war.
        This must be the last round of violence and instability
    that Milosevic is allowed to inflict on his citizens and
    neighbors. We agree on the immediate goals. As you know, Madam
    Secretary, I supported the air strike resolution. I supported
    the proposal offered by the senior Senator from Arizona, which
    the administration was not keen on, which gave the President
    any and all authority he needed to wrap this war up in a
    positive way.
        I am on your side on trying to conclude this and achieve
    the goals, the stated goals, which is Kosovars back in Kosova
    and an international shield to protect them. But I do think
    when you have supporters such as myself suggesting that we need
    to sit down now--and you and I touched on this briefly in a
    conversation last night--to begin to plan together what comes
    next, I am deadly serious about it, because we are going to
    have to start marking this bill up in the next few weeks. We
    would like to do it as a result of some serious consultation
    about what you envision may be our responsibilities in the wake
    of the conclusion of this war, hopefully in a positive way, as
    I just indicated.
        So that is what I am going to want to focus on today as we
    get into your testimony.
        Senator Leahy is not yet here.

          prepared statements of senator leahy and senator lautenberg

        Senator Leahy and Senator Lautenberg were unable to attend
    this hearing, we have received their prepared statements and
    they will be inserted into the record at this point.
        [The statements follow:]
                 Prepared Statement of Senator Patrick J. Leahy
        Madame Secretary, we appreciate you being here. With the number of
    crises that you are trying to manage right now I can imagine that this
    is not necessarily the way you would choose to spend this morning.
        I do not have a long opening statement. Let me just say that I do
    read the newspapers and I am not among those who blames the
    Administration for everything that is wrong in the world. The United
    States cannot wave a magic wand and fix every problem. Many of the
    problems we face were inherited by this Administration. The United
    States is exercising leadership in many areas, and it is making a
    difference.
        Having said that, I am concerned by what I see as a foreign policy
    that lacks a sense of priorities, or focus. We seem to lurch from one
    crisis to the next, trying to solve them in isolation from the bigger
    picture. Two of our most important goals--strengthening relations with
    Russia and China, seem to be among the most elusive.
        I felt strongly that NATO should respond to President Milosevic's
    war crimes, but I also feel that the bungled way NATO has responded,
    and it's failure, so far, to achieve it's goals in Kosova, have damaged
    NATO's image as an invincible military alliance.
        A quarter of the world's people are dirt poor. I don't think many
    Americans realize how desperate life is for so many people, on
    practically every continent. Yet despite everything that we and others
    are doing to improve living conditions in those countries, it falls far
    short of what is needed.
        And this year, you are proposing a cut in our contribution to the
    U.N. Development Program. I think that sends the wrong message.
        I completely agree with the strong warnings in your written
    testimony about our budget situation this year. Trying to respond to so
    many challenges around the world costs money, but we face a budget
    ceiling that will make it impossible to respond as we should--whether
    it is to stop the spread of AIDS, support economic development, or
    support non- proliferation programs. As you say, it is budgeting cut
    off from reality.
        So we all share responsibility for a situation which I believe
    calls for a serious review of what our foreign policy priorities are,
    and what it would cost to achieve them. That is a process the
    Administration needs to lead, and which involves the bipartisan
    participation of the congressional leadership.
        I am interested in your views on this, Madame Secretary.
    Unfortunately I suspect that to do what I am suggesting will not be
    possible until the next Administration, and a Congress that is more
    interested in solving problems than scoring political points.
                                     ______

               Prepared Statement of Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
        Mr. Chairman, I join you in welcoming the Secretary of State to
    testify before this subcommittee on the Administration's budget request
    for fiscal year 2000. The funding provided for Foreign Operations is
    crucial for America's engagement with other countries and peoples and
    for our ability to shape the world on the basis of our values and
    interests.
        As you know, I serve as the Ranking Member on the Senate Budget
    Committee. During debate on the Budget Resolution in the Committee and
    on the Senate floor, we gave due consideration to the need for
    increased foreign affairs funding.
        The Budget Resolution we adopted in the Senate included Sense of
    the Senate language supporting strong foreign affairs spending and
    urging that funding for essential Embassy security upgrades not come at
    the expense of our foreign affairs programs.
        However, the Budget Resolution Conference Report put forward by the
    Majority did not heed the will of the Senate. Instead of increasing
    international affairs spending, that Budget Resolution cut the
    President's request for Function 150 by more than 15 percent.
        America's global leadership should not be a partisan issue. I hope
    my colleagues understand that our role in the world is determined by
    more than defense spending to achieve military might.
        The full Appropriations Committee will soon decide on allocations
    to the Subcommittees for our fiscal year 2000 bills. The proposed
    allocation for the Foreign Operations Subcommittee published in the
    press is only $12.5 billion. While that's far better than the dreadful
    House number, it would be a significant reduction even from the fiscal
    year 1999 allocation for this subcommittee.
        Mr. Chairman, I don't see how we can even hope to meet the most
    pressing needs within the proposed funding level, which is more than $2
    billion short of the Administration's request, even factoring in only
    the fiscal year 2000 portion of the Wye aid package.
        In fact, I think each of us on this Subcommittee could easily
    identify areas where the President's budget request would not provide
    sufficient funding. The ongoing crisis in the Balkans, which is
    creating urgent needs for humanitarian assistance well beyond the
    timeframe of the Supplemental bill, is but one example.
        Secretary Albright, I hope you will give us a realistic assessment
    of the consequences for United States global leadership if we reduce
    foreign affairs spending to this degree.
        I am deeply concerned that our leadership, our values and our
    interests around the world will suffer tremendously.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

                summary statement of Hon. Madeleine K. Albright

        Senator McConnell. What I would like to do, Madam
    Secretary, is call on you. We will put your written statement
    in the record, call on you for your observations, and we will
    move ahead. Thank you very much.
        Secretary Albright. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
    Senator Specter, and thank you very much for giving me this
    opportunity. It is important that you review my written
    statement because there are lots of subjects in there that I am
    not going to be able to get to.
        I think that the events of the past year, especially in the
    Balkans, the Gulf, Asia, and Africa, illustrate the range of
    perils that do exist in the world.
        Senator McConnell. Move that mike a little closer to you.
    Move the mike a little closer.
        Secretary Albright. I was talking about the range of perils
    that exist in the decade at the end of the cold war. I am very
    pleased to hear what you have to say, because I have come here
    in search of the tools we need to respond to those perils and
    to seize the opportunities for enhancing our security.
        This subcommittee has generally supported adequate funding
    for international programs, and for that I thank you and salute
    you. I really particularly want to thank you for your help in
    gaining approval of the President's request for the urgent
    supplemental funding for Central America, Jordan, and Kosova,
    and I think again your actions on this reflect your
    understanding of the need for resources.
        Now we come to the problem. Unfortunately, this year's
    Congressional budget resolution reflects no such understanding.
    Under it, this subcommittee and your counterpart in the other
    body are expected to receive budget allocations for foreign
    operations that are 14 to 29 percent below the President's
    requests, and this is simply not acceptable.
        It will remove your flexibility and mine and the kinds of
    things you are talking about will be even worse. The numbers
    are disastrous in their own right. But because of commitments
    we have already made and the way that the budget spends out, we
    may well be required to make far greater cuts, as much as one-
    half or two-thirds in many programs that are essential to
    American interests.
        Now, we have really looked at the kinds of things that will
    happen. So anyone who says we should lead in countering terror
    or fighting drugs or halting proliferation or promoting
    American exports should agree we cannot make progress toward
    these goals if we slash the resources devoted to them.
        You know and I know that we cannot conduct an effective
    foreign policy with the budget allocations now being
    considered, and we have to find a way around this problem.
    Also, we cannot allow the budget resolution to become a writ of
    surrender for American leadership.
        This morning I ask your support for the President's budget
    request in its entirety and will highlight the key components
    as I proceed. But I also ask your support for our effort and
    NATO's to oppose the ethnic cleansing and war crimes in Kosova.
    I am very grateful, Mr. Chairman, for your support on all this,
    and we have had discussions. We will continue them this
    morning. But I would like to voice my appreciation to you.
        We do not know how many innocent people President
    Milosevic's troops have killed in Kosova, but we have reports
    of 500 villages burned or destroyed, of 60 villages where
    executions have occurred, of mass grave sites, of women
    systematically raped, and of more than 1 million people driven
    from their homes.
        I have with me today two tapes that basically show the
    carnage that has taken place and showns how we have been able
    through corroboration of victims' statements and technical
    means to show that what has really taken place took place in a
    particular area and are able to corroborate the kinds of
    horrors that we have been hearing about. We will obviously make
    those available to you.
        All of what is going on in terms of what Milosevic is doing
    is not an accident. It is the result of his deliberate plan to
    kill, terrorize or expel an entire ethnic community, and it is
    happening in NATO's front yard.
        Over the past year we did all that we could to resolve this
    crisis diplomatically, and in response to this Milosevic
    violated his commitments and refused to negotiate and launched
    his campaign of terror. But Milosevic will not get away with
    it, because NATO will not let him.
        Our air operations are steadily destroying Belgrade's
    capabilities and morale, and day by day we are intensifying
    these operations. We are tightening the economic restrictions
    and we are aiding the refugees, and we are getting the truth
    out through an active campaign of public information, including
    to the Serb people. We are continuing our diplomatic efforts to
    achieve an outcome based on the conditions that NATO has set.
        For example, we are insisting that NATO be at the core of
    any international military presence in Kosova, and we do this
    not as a matter of theology, but of reality, because after what
    has happened there is no way that the refugees will or should
    return home without credible security guarantees.
        Mr. Chairman, we all want this confrontation to end, but we
    must have the patience and spine to ensure that it does so on
    the right terms. More than a century ago, Abraham Lincoln,
    Kentucky's greatest son, urged Americans to have faith that
    right makes might and in that faith to do our duty and
    understand it. I think it is very important now to reaffirm
    that faith, and NATO's campaign is being conducted on behalf of
    a cause that is just, by an alliance that is united in its
    goals, against a regime that is both isolated and profoundly
    wrong. We are making progress, and we will persist and we will
    prevail.
        The current crisis I think highlights the need to integrate
    the Balkans more fully into the Euro-Atlantic community. I do
    hope that as we get into the questioning we can talk more about
    our plans for Southeast Europe and get more into the details of
    what you have been asking about, because the problems that
    plague the region of competition for resources and ethnic
    rivalry and religious intolerance are important for that region
    and we have to deal with it, but they are by no means
    restricted just to that part of the world, and I think that it
    is very important that we pursue an active policy there.
        During the NATO summit the President and our allies
    launched a coordinated effort to develop a plan to transform
    the Balkans from the continent's primary source of instability
    into an integral part of the European mainstream. This will
    require the deep involvement of the European Union and the
    international financial institutions. It will require a
    willingness on the part of the local leaders to work together
    on behalf of a common good, and it will require ultimately a
    change in leadership in Belgrade so that the democratic
    aspirations of the Serb people may be fulfilled and the
    isolation of the former Yugoslavia can come to an end.
        Our efforts to promote lasting stability across Europe are
    essential, but they are also mirrored in our own hemisphere
    through the summit of the Americas process. Here our challenge
    is to translate the promise of reform into the reality of
    enduring and broadly shared prosperity and to strengthen the
    fragile democratic institutions.
        Our major test in the hemisphere is in Colombia, where we
    have committed to helping President Pastrana secure peace and
    re-establish the rule of law.
        Similarly in Asia, we are working with allies and partners
    to improve security cooperation, restore economic momentum, and
    build democracy, and in this region there is no greater threat
    to peace and stability than the situation on the Korean
    Peninsula. With our Korean and Japanese allies and China, we
    are seeking ways to reduce tensions. To this end, we have
    vigorously pressed our concerns about North Korea's long-range
    missile program and we have reached an agreement that, starting
    this week, will allow multiple visits to inspect underground
    constructions at Kumchang-ni, and we continue to insist that
    North Korea meet its obligation under the Agreed Framework.
        That framework froze North Korea's plutonium production and
    separation facilities at Yongbien and brought them under IAEA
    monitoring. Eventually they are to be dismantled and the
    nuclear fuel shipped out. As long as North Korea is abiding by
    the Agreed Framework, our support for it is vital and I urge
    members to provide that support by approving the President's
    request for $55 million for the Korean Peninsula Energy
    Development Organization, KEDO.
        Meanwhile, as the committee is aware, former Secretary of
    Defense William Perry was asked by the President and me to take
    a long, hard look at the U.S. approach to North Korea, and Dr.
    Perry has been working diligently and in close consultation
    with our allies and many on Capitol Hill and with outside
    experts and his work is nearly done.
        But before submitting his conclusions, Dr. Perry will
    travel to Pyongyang along with Ambassador Wendy Sherman and a
    small delegation during the period from May 25 to May 28. While
    there, he will explore and assess in person the views of the
    senior North Korean officials. He will also consult with South
    Korean and Japanese leaders both en route to and returning from
    the North Korean capital. The administration will of course
    continue to keep Congress briefed on all these developments.
        Also in East Asia, we have continued our strategic dialogue
    with Beijing. Our approach is not based on any illusions about
    China, which remains undemocratic and undecided about its
    future role in the world. But the choices China makes in years
    to come will do much to determine the future security and
    prosperity of the region, and we would be remiss in our own
    responsibility if we did not encourage China to make choices
    that reconcile its interests with those of others in the Asia
    Pacific, including with us.
        The basic reality was not changed either by NATO's tragic
    and mistaken bombing of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade or by
    the subsequent damage done to our diplomatic and consular
    facilities in China. It is essential that these events not harm
    the potential for future U.S.-Chinese cooperation and that we
    continue where we can to narrow differences and establish
    common ground.
        Elsewhere in Asia, Mr. Chairman, I want to highlight the
    importance of the upcoming elections in Indonesia, where both
    you and I have visited in recent months. Our interest there is
    not in the electoral outcome, but rather in the process, and
    that is why we are supporting efforts by local organizations to
    educate voters, train poll watchers, and discourage violence.
    We are also backing efforts to end the fighting in East Timor
    and to determine its future status in accordance with popular
    will.
        In the Middle East, we continue to work with regional
    leaders on behalf of peace and we congratulate Israel's
    incoming Prime Minister Ehud Barak for his victory in this
    week's election. Once a new government is formed, we hope
    Israelis and Palestinians will move ahead to fully implement
    obligations negotiated at Wye and to launch permanent status
    talks with the goal of an agreement within 1 year. We will also
    be prepared to undertake a new effort to make progress on the
    Syrian and Lebanese tracks.
        As we pursue our diplomatic initiatives, I hope we can
    count on the subcommittee's backing for programs that aid our
    partners and support the peace process.
        In the Gulf, last December we responded forcefully to Iraqi
    violations. We continue to defend pilots patrolling the no-fly
    zone and we are working with the Security Council to develop
    means for resuming inspections and the monitoring of Iraq's
    remaining weapons of mass destruction capabilities. We support
    the desires of the Iraqi people to re-integrate themselves
    internationally by freeing themselves domestically from a
    leader they do not want, do not deserve, and never chose.
        Mr. Chairman, the new century will demand for us a fresh
    approach to the dangers and opportunities in Africa. Today,
    with regional leaders we are searching for ways to end bloody
    conflicts from the Sudan and the Horn of Africa to the Congo
    and Sierra Leone, where we hope a lasting breakthrough has been
    achieved. However, these immediate crises must not cause us to
    neglect long-term goals.
        I urge your backing for our efforts to support peace, aid
    development, strengthen the rule of law, and in Nigeria to
    assist the critical but fragile transition to democracy.
        Many of the measures we take to protect American security
    and prosperity are directed at particular countries or parts of
    the world. But others can best be considered in global terms,
    and these include our international economic leadership, the
    war against terror, drugs and crime, and initiatives to promote
    human rights and support humanitarian de-mining efforts around
    the globe.
        They also include our strategy for safeguarding American
    security by preventing weapons of mass destruction and the
    missiles that deliver them from falling into the wrong hands.
    This year we are requesting $250 million for the State
    Department's programs under the President's expanded threat
    reduction initiatives. These programs seek to enhance our
    security by discouraging the proliferation of weapons expertise
    and helping the new independent states to tighten export
    controls and improve border security.
        Mr. Chairman, I think that we know that we have a very
    important job ahead of us, and I can only reflect that a little
    more than 50 years ago only a short distance from where we are
    now President Harry Truman delivered his first and only
    inaugural address. In what came to be known as the Four Points
    Speech, he challenged Democrats and Republicans alike to lend a
    hand to those struggling for freedom and human rights, to
    continue programs for world economic recovery, to strengthen
    international organizations, and to draw on our country's
    expertise to help others help themselves in the battle against
    ignorance, illness, and despair.

                               prepared statement

        Today we are summoned to meet similar responsibilities in a
    far different time and to honor the principles that will endure
    for all time. As I have said to you many times, I pledge my own
    best efforts to accomplish this and respectfully solicit yours.
        [The statement follows:]
                  Prepared Statement of Madeleine K. Albright
                         u.s. foreign operations budget
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, good morning. I am
    pleased to be here to seek your support for the Administration's
    request for funds for the foreign operations programs of the United
    States.
        At the outset, let me thank this Subcommittee and its members for
    their leadership in supporting a principled and purposeful U.S. foreign
    policy. We have not always agreed on all subjects, but the
    disagreements have almost always been on tactics, not goals.
        For we all know America's purpose. It is freedom. We Americans are
    dedicated to the rights of all people. We promote government with the
    consent of the governed. We believe in law. We cherish peace. We seek
    prosperity.
        Having said this, we have not said very much. For it is easy to
    list goals. Our task, together, you and me, America and our friends
    overseas, is to achieve them.
        About a decade ago, we began a journey into a new era. We set out
    free from Cold War bonds, but soon were plagued by other perils. Along
    the way, we have not always put our foot right, but overall we have
    made great progress.
        Because the signposts of the past have fallen, history demands that
    we be innovators and trailblazers, builders of new institutions and
    adapters of old.
        So in virtually every part of every continent, we work with others
    to bring nations closer together around basic principles of democracy
    and law, open markets and a commitment to peace.
        We do this because it is right, but also because it is essential to
    protect the best interests of our nation and people. In this era, our
    security, prosperity and freedom hinge on whether others, too, have
    access to these blessings. And the future depends on whether we can
    help shape a world in which disputes are settled, prosperity is shared,
    criminals are caught, aggressors are deterred and basic human rights
    are respected.
        Mr. Chairman, we need the full measure of American influence and
    leadership at this critical time. The scope of our national interests
    and the connections between our global role and our prosperity require
    it. The range of threats to our security demands it. And, as recent
    events in the Balkans, the Gulf, Asia and Africa remind us, the world
    will not wait.
        That is why I come before you in search of the resources and tools
    we need to respond to perils and seize opportunities for ensuring our
    security, promoting our prosperity and upholding our values.
        This Subcommittee has generally supported funding for international
    programs and for that, I thank you. In particular, I salute your
    support for a supplemental to meet urgent needs in Kosova and Southeast
    Europe as well as Central America and Jordan.
        I was gratified to see so many Senators, including several of you,
    travel to Southeast Europe or Central America earlier this year. You
    gained firsthand knowledge of the human tragedies and foreign policy
    challenges we face. You returned committed to seeing that the State
    Department has the resources to get our part of the job of relief and
    reconstruction done right. And your efforts are paying off.
        I hope that we can work together in that same spirit to maintaining
    next year, and in the years to come, the quality of diplomatic
    leadership that can prevent crises from ever occurring--and respond to
    them quickly when they do happen.
        Unfortunately, this year the budget allocations being contemplated
    would require drastic reductions in the funding requested by the
    President for foreign operations--cuts in the range of 14-29 percent.
    This appears the outcome of a process shut off from the realities of
    the world in which we live. It is arithmetic, not statecraft, and it
    presents us with a shared problem.
        Cuts of this magnitude would gravely imperil immediate and long-
    term American interests. Let me explain how.
        The low funding levels would be bad enough, but they are
    complicated by limits on spending.
        Because foreign aid spends out over several years, aid commitments
    made in previous years account for half of the spending, our outlays,
    in the President's budget request. A lower fiscal year 2000 spending
    ceiling means that prior year commitments will account for an even
    greater proportion of the total, leaving very little room for new
    spending. To meet our prior commitments, we might well be required to
    make other cuts, as much as one-half to two- thirds, in programs that
    are essential to American interests.
        This is tantamount to the surrender of American leadership around
    the world.
        Anyone who says we should do more to counter terror, or fight
    drugs, or halt proliferation, or promote American exports, or prevent
    the abuse of human rights should agree that it is not possible to
    accomplish any of these goals without resources.
        This is not a partisan issue. The call for a strong U.S. foreign
    policy comes from leaders in both parties. I hope, Mr. Chairman, that
    we can answer it together--and work to assure funding levels that
    provide our citizens with the diplomatic leadership they deserve.
                      american leadership around the world
    Europe and the New Independent States
        Mr. Chairman, this year we mark the tenth anniversary of the fall
    of the Berlin Wall, and the fiftieth anniversary of the founding of
    NATO. It is an appropriate time to rededicate ourselves to the goal of
    a new Europe--undivided, democratic and at peace.
        But the continent cannot be whole and free as long as its southeast
    corner is wracked by ethnic tensions and threatened with conflict. And
    throughout this decade, the primary source of rancor and violence in
    this region has been the ruthless incitement of ethnic hatred by
    authorities in Belgrade.
        The current campaign of ethnic cleansing in Kosova is an assault on
    universal values of respect for human rights and dignity. The resulting
    outflow of refugees is both horrifying and profoundly destabilizing.
    And Milosevic's repeated use of violence and terror poses a profound
    threat to the security and character of Europe.
        NATO was right to respond. And, despite the difficulties we face,
    we will prevail. NATO, the European Union, and our G-8 partners
    including Russia have united around terms for an acceptable end to the
    crisis. Serb security forces must leave so that refugees can safely re-
    enter. An international security presence must be allowed, with NATO at
    its core. And the people of Kosova must be given the democratic self-
    government they have long deserved.
        We are continuing to work, through military and diplomatic means,
    to make Belgrade understand that these terms offer the only prospect
    for peace. And we continue to support the International Criminal
    Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in its effort to ensure that those
    who commit or order atrocities in Kosova will be held accountable.
        The current crisis highlights the need to integrate the Balkans
    more fully into the Euro-Atlantic Community of democracies. We do not
    want this conflict to serve as a prelude to others.
        In the weeks ahead, we will be consulting with you, and working
    with regional leaders, our Allies and international financial
    institutions to develop a strategy for bringing Europe's southeast
    corner into the continent's mainstream.
        The President's budget proposal, as you know, was presented before
    Belgrade turned away from negotiations and chose the course of war and
    mayhem. It foresees an extensive international presence in Kosova, but
    not the military force that will now be required. I hope we can work
    closely together, Mr. Chairman, to revise our request to take account
    of the situation in the region--and to ensure that we and our European
    partners do our part to build a solid foundation for a new generation
    of peace.
        That is what we are doing--with NATO, the EU, Russia and others--in
    Bosnia. Completing the implementation of the Dayton Accords would
    remove a major threat to European security and establish a model for
    inter-ethnic cooperation that is needed throughout the Balkans and
    around the world.
        Since the Accords were signed three years ago, enormous progress
    has been made. And as peace has returned, we have steadily reduced our
    troop presence, and worked to return decision-making to Bosnian hands.
        But the nation's bitter divisions are only partially healed. If the
    promise of Dayton is to be fulfilled, we must stand firm in our support
    for Bosnia. I ask your support for our request of $175 million to help
    refugees return home, buttress democracy and human rights, foster
    foreign investment and a free-market economy, professionalize Bosnia's
    police and reinforce regional stability. And to serve our interests
    throughout this corner of Europe, I ask your support for the
    President's SEED request encompassing all of Southeast Europe, which
    totals $393 million.
        Beyond the Balkans, Mr. Chairman, we are working with our friends,
    allies and partners to create new institutions and adapt old ones to
    meet the challenges of the new era. And with every step forward, we
    draw closer to our vision of a Europe whole and free.
        With the President's personal leadership, and crucial help from
    former Senator George Mitchell, we have supported the people of Ireland
    in their desire to end terror and live in peace through implementation
    of the historic ``Good Friday'' agreement.
        I want to thank this Subcommittee once more for its support for the
    annual U.S. contribution to the International Fund for Ireland. This is
    a valuable expression of our support for peace in Northern Ireland.
        With Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, we have signed the U.S.-Baltic
    Charter, to show support for the freedom and security of those nations
    and for their efforts to join western institutions. And we are pursuing
    our Northeast Europe Initiative to build bridges among the nations of
    the Nordic and Baltic region.
        Under the New Transatlantic Agenda, we are working with the
    European Union to meet the challenges we both face around the world,
    such as humanitarian disasters, proliferation threats, international
    crime, and differences over trade. We strongly support the expansion of
    the European Union (EU) into central and eastern Europe, and Turkey's
    desire to be part of that process. We are working hard to ease tensions
    in the Aegean and continue to explore every opportunity for progress
    towards a settlement on Cyprus.
        We are among those striving to help the Organization for Security
    Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) meet its potential as a catalyst for
    democratic change, tolerance and respect for human rights.
        With our allies, we last month set the course for NATO's second
    fifty years. At the Washington Summit, we welcomed NATO's three new
    members, with strong Congressional support. We recognized collective
    defense as the core mission of the Alliance, but resolved to prepare to
    respond to the full range of threats the Alliance may face. And we
    resolved to further develop our partnerships with other European
    democracies.
        Further to the east, democratic change remains very much a work in
    progress. In many countries, respect for human rights and the rule of
    law is weak and economic reforms have been slowed by financial turmoil.
        We will continue to help countries in the region find the right
    road. We do this for reasons of principle, but also because this part
    of the world is critical to our own long-term security and prosperity.
        We are determined to maintain our pragmatic partnership with Russia
    in the many areas where our interests coincide. The fact is, on a
    variety of security, financial, and global matters, Russia has
    continued to do serious business with the United States and with
    western institutions, notwithstanding our differences over Kosova. We
    have moved forward on important issues such as the HEU agreement, the
    Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty and the Civil Aviation agreement.
        We have made noteworthy progress toward the goal of completing CFE
    negotiations by the time of the OSCE summit later this year.
        And we have maintained frequent contacts, from President Yeltsin on
    down, in an effort to bring Russia on board over Kosova. I will also
    mention that we have not seen that cooperation change since the
    departure of Prime Minister Primakov last week.
        Obviously, it remains to be seen how Russian politics will evolve.
    But one thing is constant--America's interest in encouraging a peaceful
    and democratic Russia to tackle its economic problems and play a
    constructive international role. It should not be surprising that the
    Russian transition from Communism to a more open system is proving
    difficult. Our own democracy took many decades to mature and remains
    unfinished. We have an enormous stake in Russian success and will
    continue to help as long as Russia is committed to the path of reform.
        We are sustaining our strategic partnership with Ukraine--knowing
    that an independent, democratic, prosperous and stable Ukraine remains
    a key to building a secure and undivided Europe. This year we will
    continue to support Ukraine's economic and political reforms, press for
    a free and fair Presidential election, enhance cooperation under the
    NATO-Ukraine Charter and strengthen joint nonproliferation efforts. As
    Ukraine prepares for elections this year, it is essential that
    President Kuchma demonstrate the leadership, and the Rada the wisdom,
    to press ahead with overdue reforms.
        In February, after the most searching consideration, I was able to
    certify that the requirements of U.S. law with respect to Ukraine's
    business climate were met--albeit just barely. But I would urge
    Congress to reconsider the wisdom of the certification requirement, as
    it has become an impediment to our credibility and steady engagement in
    Ukraine. I look forward to working with Congress and the U.S. business
    community to ensure a level playing field for American economic
    interests in Ukraine.
        Throughout the NIS, a great deal of work remains to be done to
    build stable democratic governments and functioning, transparent market
    economies. And the United States has a continuing interest in fostering
    regional cooperation in Caspian energy development and transportation
    infrastructure. I welcome the great Congressional interest and support
    for these issues.
        In the coming year, we hope to see progress on resolving the
    conflicts in Nagorno-Karabakh and Abkhazia, and are engaged with all
    parties toward that end.
        We renew our request this year for legislation to repeal Section
    907 of the Freedom Support Act. This provision hinders our ability to
    advance America's national interests in Azerbaijan and the Caucasus.
    Eliminating it would restore balance to our policy toward Azerbaijan
    and Armenia, and reinforce our role as an honest broker in the peace
    process.
        We are monitoring with concern the rise of repression in Belarus,
    and supporting NGOs and media outlets to help opposition views reach
    the public. And we are preparing to facilitate withdrawal of Russian
    troops from Moldova, by requesting funding under the Expanded Threat
    Reduction Initiative for disposal of munitions and force relocation.
        And, as every country in the region holds elections this year or
    next, I ask your support for our efforts to ensure that they be free
    and fair.
        Our support for democratic and market reform will not re-make the
    region overnight. But it can help those in the region who are helping
    themselves to move in the right direction.
        For example, our support fosters economic development by
    encouraging investment in small businesses; helps to build accountable
    democratic institutions; and fights the crime and corruption that have
    shadowed emerging markets. It helps sustain and expand our
    nonproliferation programs, which I will discuss shortly. Our assistance
    is focused on exchanges, civil society and the private sector; and it
    is increasingly directed toward the regions, not concentrated in
    capitals.
        We fund these NIS programs neither as a favor to governments in the
    region nor as a stamp of approval of all their policies, but because
    they serve American interests. And frankly, we need to do more. So I
    urge you to back our full request of $1.032 billion this year. And I
    ask that you ensure that we have the flexibility we need to support
    democratic and market reforms in accordance with America's interests.
    The Western Hemisphere
        Here in our own hemisphere, we have important interests dictated
    not only by proximity of geography, but by proximity of values.
        The nations of Latin America and the Caribbean have made great
    progress over the past two decades, but serious problems remain. These
    include poverty, inequality and corruption; there are still recurring
    crises, including natural disasters, political turmoil, and financial
    instability. But there is now a broad and deepening consensus across
    the region on how to deal with these challenges, and a willingness to
    work cooperatively on them. I ask you to ensure that we have the
    resources we need to help make the most of this historic opportunity.
        Five years ago, at the Summit in Miami, President Clinton and the
    other 33 democratic leaders of our hemisphere affirmed a commitment to
    democracy and market economics, and developed an action plan to help
    make a difference in people's daily lives.
        At the heart of the Summit process is a commitment to free and fair
    trade and economic integration. In recent years, every major economy in
    the region has liberalized its system for investment and trade; and we
    have begun negotiations to achieve a Free Trade Area of the Americas by
    2005.
        As a result of its continuing market-based reforms, Latin America
    has been relatively successful in weathering the global financial
    crisis; our exports to this region have continued to rise steadily even
    during the recent periods of turbulence. To complete this
    transformation, we must follow through on our free trade agenda and
    give the President the same authority to negotiate trade agreements as
    his recent predecessors have had.
        As they pursue a shared trade agenda, the leaders of our hemisphere
    are also working together to ensure that the promise of economic reform
    translates into steadily improved standards of living for ordinary
    citizens. At last year's Summit in Santiago, they approved initiatives
    to promote small business development, increase investments in
    education, and address wide and increasing inequalities between the
    rich and poor.
        The focus on broad-based economic development is central to our
    strategy for helping our neighbors in the Caribbean and Central America
    recover from Hurricane Georges and Hurricane Mitch--among the worst
    natural disasters ever to strike the Western Hemisphere.
        I welcome your support for our supplemental request in this area.
    The hurricane season is upon Central America and the Caribbean again,
    and we will be able to put this money to immediate use in repairing
    last year's damage and helping prepare against the ravages of future
    storms. It is particularly timely, as the international donor community
    will hold a consultative group meeting in Stockholm May 24-28 to
    discuss Central American reconstruction.
        Approving the supplemental was a vital step in aiding the recovery
    of Central America, but sustained recovery also requires expanding
    trade and creating jobs. Ultimately, job creation and economic
    development in Central America and the Caribbean are the keys to long-
    term stability and to stemming the flow of illegal immigration. These
    are the goals of the Caribbean Basin Trade Enhancement legislation
    which the Administration submitted in March. I urge Congress to adopt
    this legislation promptly.
        As the recent disasters so starkly demonstrate, economic
    development is often a series of two steps forward, one step back. What
    is required is long-term commitment.
        Support for democracy requires the same kind of determination and
    steadiness. Every democracy, including our own, remains a work in
    progress. We should not let the occasional discouraging headline
    distract us from the remarkable gains made over the past two decades,
    as nation after nation in our hemisphere has embraced the principles of
    representative and constitutional government.
        Consider, for example, some of the crises of the last few months:
    serious political conflicts over economic policy in Ecuador; an
    assassination in Paraguay that triggered a presidential resignation;
    and a political stalemate in Haiti which may be lessening but is still
    unresolved. In each of these countries, democracy is not yet deeply-
    rooted. Ten years ago, how would we have expected these crises to be
    resolved?
        None of these stories is yet complete. But despite the turmoil, the
    leaders and citizens of these countries have NOT pushed aside democracy
    and the rule of law; the militaries have NOT stepped in as alleged
    national saviors; political differences have NOT degenerated into
    widespread violence, even when there were thousands marching in the
    streets. Instead, from Asuncion to Quito to Port-au-Prince, we have
    seen negotiations within a constitutional framework, and efforts to
    forge broad-based, multi-party coalitions.
        Let me also say a few words about Colombia, a country that is a
    major priority of our current democracy efforts.
        Colombia is not a new democracy; but its political institutions are
    under terrible strain, as the government tries to cope with a bloody
    civil conflict, massive drug trafficking, and economic stagnation. The
    January 25th earthquake was also a huge blow.
        Since taking office last summer, President Pastrana has worked hard
    to reestablish the rule of law, restore fiscal responsibility, and
    secure peace. He offers the best chance in years to put Colombia back
    on the right course and deserves our support.
        President Pastrana and other elected leaders around the hemisphere
    are valuable partners in the effort to strengthen democratic
    institutions and improve standards of living. Unfortunately, Fidel
    Castro continues to justify his pariah status by throwing dissidents
    and human rights advocates in prison, and refusing to hold free and
    fair elections. Our response is guided by one simple principle: the
    Cuban people deserve the same rights and liberties as their
    counterparts from Argentina to Alaska.
        In January, President Clinton announced a series of steps, building
    on measures the Administration took the previous March, which expand
    our efforts to reach out to the Cuban people and help prepare for a
    peaceful transition to democracy. In particular, we have made it easier
    for Cubans to be in touch with family and friends in the United States,
    and easier for the Cuban-American community to help those on the
    island. As the President made clear, our goal is to strengthen people-
    to-people ties and encourage the development in Cuba of peaceful
    activities independent of the government.
    The Asia-Pacific
        In the Asia-Pacific, we are working with allies and partners to
    improve security cooperation, restore economic momentum and build
    democracy.
        As President Clinton and Prime Minister Obuchi reaffirmed in their
    summit earlier this month, the U.S.-Japan alliance remains the
    cornerstone of regional security, and we are reinvigorating that
    alliance through the implementation of new guidelines for defense
    cooperation. With the world's second largest economy, Japan is also an
    economic key. We are encouraging Tokyo to continue and expand its
    program of deregulation, market- opening and other measures to restore
    growth.
        There is no greater threat to peace and stability in the Asia
    Pacific than the situation on the Korean Peninsula. With our Korean and
    Japanese allies, and China, we are seeking ways to reduce tensions with
    North Korea and make progress towards a permanent settlement.
        To this end, we have vigorously pressed our concerns about North
    Korea's development, deployment, testing and export of long range
    missiles. We have reached an agreement that will allow U.S. inspection
    of underground construction at Kumchang-ni, thereby assuring--at a
    minimum--the suspension of any destabilizing activities that may have
    been occurring at that site. And we continue to insist that North Korea
    meet its obligation under the Agreed Framework to freeze and dismantle
    its ability to produce fissile material which can be used in nuclear
    weapons.
        As members of the Subcommittee know, former Defense Secretary Perry
    is currently conducting a comprehensive review of U.S. policy towards
    North Korea. He has sought extensive Congressional input and consulted
    closely with the South Korean and Japanese governments. We expect Dr.
    Perry to present his findings and recommendations to the President very
    soon.
        Also in East Asia, we have continued our principled and purposeful
    engagement with China. The tragic and mistaken bombing by NATO of the
    Chinese embassy in Belgrade, for which President Clinton and other
    Alliance leaders have apologized, should not alter the fundamental
    relationship between our two countries.
        Cooperation between the United States and China is vital to
    regional security, prosperity and peace. Neither country can benefit
    from a policy of confrontation or isolation.
        Since the U.S.-China Strategic Dialogue began a half decade ago, we
    have seen China move from being part of the nuclear proliferation
    problem to becoming part of the solution. It has endorsed extension of
    the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; signed the Comprehensive Test Ban
    Treaty (CTBT); become party to the Chemical Weapons Convention;
    promised not to assist unsafeguarded nuclear facilities; supported
    peace talks on Korea; and played a responsible role during the Asian
    financial crisis.
        We need to recognize these gains, even as we press for further
    progress.
        On economic issues, we are continuing our effort to negotiate an
    agreement that would enable China to join the World Trade Organization
    on commercially viable terms.
        On proliferation, we are urging China to take the necessary steps
    to become party to the Missile Technology Control Regime.
        And on human rights, we are pressing Beijing to live up to the
    standards of the UN covenants it has signed, including the
    International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. We have also
    urged China to resume dialogue with the Dalai Lama.
        As I have said before, in our relations with China, engagement is
    not endorsement. We continue to have disagreements with Beijing. But we
    also believe that the way to narrow those differences, and to take
    advantage of the many areas where U.S. and Chinese interests coincide,
    is through regular contacts and dialogue.
        Elsewhere in the region, we are strongly supporting those committed
    to political and economic reform.
        While visiting Indonesia this spring, I spoke both publicly and
    privately about the importance of holding free, fair and credible
    elections on June 7, and about the need for the Indonesian military to
    do more to stop violence without abusing human rights. I also discussed
    with Indonesian leaders the ongoing effort to reach a just and peaceful
    resolution of the status of East Timor. My emphasis was on the need to
    disarm paramilitary forces, promote stability, and respect the will of
    East Timor's people as the transition to a new status takes place.
        In Cambodia, we are continuing to work with ASEAN, Japan, Australia
    and others to strengthen democracy. We are encouraged by the progress
    that has been made towards political reconciliation, and are urging
    authorities to bring senior Khmer Rouge leaders from the 1975-1979
    period to justice under credible, internationally-sanctioned
    procedures.
        In Burma, we continue to advocate a meaningful dialogue between the
    authorities there and the democratic opposition, led by the National
    League for Democracy (NLD). We are deeply concerned by the attempts
    made throughout the past year to harass and intimidate NLD leaders.
    Officials in Rangoon must understand that the path to international
    acceptance and economic progress lies in movement towards a legitimate
    and popularly supported government.
    South Asia
        Mr. Chairman, South Asia receives a relatively small amount of
    American assistance--but the region has a significant impact on our
    national interests.
        Last year's nuclear tests by India and Pakistan posed a threat to
    international security and dealt a blow to the nuclear nonproliferation
    regime. In our diplomacy, we strive to move both governments toward the
    mainstream of international proliferation policy. We are encouraging
    the parties to resolve the long-standing tensions between them; and we
    work in the process to broaden and revitalize our relations with both
    countries.
        We have made some important headway. Both India and Pakistan have
    made qualified commitments to adhere to the Comprehensive Test Ban
    Treaty (CTBT) by September; and they have pledged to join negotiations
    for a fissile material production cutoff, and to tighten export
    controls.
        Indian voters will not choose a new parliament until this fall, but
    we are determined to maintain our arms control dialogue during the
    interim period.
        More broadly, throughout the region we will be working hard to
    advance our core foreign policy objectives of enhancing economic ties,
    countering terrorism, extending the rule of law and promoting respect
    for human rights--including religious freedom, worker rights and
    women's rights.
    The Middle East
        American policy in the Middle East is designed to strengthen the
    forces of peace, encourage regional economic integration and growth,
    spur democratic progress, marginalize extremists and defeat terror.
        To these ends, we maintain our unshakable commitment to the
    security of our ally, Israel. And we continue to work with regional
    leaders in support of a just, lasting and comprehensive Middle East
    peace. This year, as we mark the twentieth anniversary of the signing
    of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty, we remember how far we have
    come--and how far we have yet to travel.
        We welcome the election of Ehud Barak as the next Prime Minister of
    Israel. Once he has formed a government and taken office, we hope to
    move forward vigorously on all aspects of the Middle East Peace
    Process. We hope for rapid implementation of all outstanding Wye
    obligations by both sides, and the start of permanent status
    negotiations with the goal of completing them within one year. We will
    also be prepared to undertake a new effort to make progress on the
    Syrian and Lebanese tracks.
        We were extremely pleased this week to receive in Washington His
    Majesty, King Abdullah of Jordan, who has pledged to maintain Jordan's
    constructive role in the peace process. With the passing of Jordan's
    King Hussein, the region lost a courageous and eloquent champion of
    peace. We have expressed our full support and friendship to the new
    King and--with the support of Congress, for which I thank you--will
    help him work to strengthen the Jordanian economy.
        Mr. Chairman, as we pursue our diplomacy, I hope we can count on
    the Subcommittee's support to fund those programs that help support the
    peace process. These include our requests for Economic Support Funds
    and Foreign Military Financing that benefit our partners in peace--
    Israelis, Egyptians, Jordanians and Palestinians--as well as regional
    programs that bring those parties together.
        In the Gulf, we will continue to work with our allies and friends,
    and within the United Nations Security Council, to confront the threats
    posed by the Iraqi regime.
        Last December, we joined our British allies in a military operation
    that degraded Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capacity and its
    ability to threaten its neighbors. We have since continued to enforce
    the southern and northern No-Fly Zones and have repeatedly acted
    against Iraqi military assets in the zones that threaten our pilots and
    aircraft.
        At the United Nations, we are working within the Security Council
    to develop a basis for resuming inspection and monitoring of Iraq's
    remaining WMD capabilities. We will insist that sanctions against the
    regime continue until Iraq meets its obligations, although we support
    easing the burdens on the Iraqi people through an enhanced oil-for-food
    program.
        Our policy towards Iraq is to counter the threat Saddam Hussein
    poses to his people, his neighbors, our allies, and our interests in
    the region until there is a change in regime in Baghdad. We must and
    will persist in thwarting Iraq's potential for aggression. And we will
    support the Iraqi people's desire to reintegrate themselves into the
    international community and free themselves from a leader they do not
    want, do not deserve, and never chose.
        Across the border from Iraq in Iran, parliamentary elections have
    reinforced clear signs of popular support for a society based on the
    rule of law and a more open approach to the world. We welcome that,
    though we are concerned that Iran continues to pursue policies--on
    proliferation, terrorism, and human rights--that violate international
    norms.
        Iran's President Khatami has called for a dialogue between our two
    peoples. Last summer, I endorsed that call and expressed a willingness
    to work with authorities in Tehran, when the time is right, to develop
    a roadmap for more normal relations. The official Iranian response thus
    far has not been encouraging, but we stand ready for a dialogue in
    which both sides would be free to discuss all issues of concern.
        Last month, two Libyans accused in the 1988 bombing of Pan Am
    flight 103 were delivered into the custody of Scottish authorities for
    trial in the Netherlands by a Scottish Court under Scottish law. This
    development is a milestone in the decade-long effort to hold
    accountable those responsible for the murders of 270 people, including
    189 Americans. The United States looks forward to the legal resolution
    of this case, and to the partial alleviation of anguish that may bring
    to those whose loved ones were lost on Pan Am 103.
    Africa
        In Africa, our challenge is to address pressing security and
    humanitarian concerns, while maintaining our focus on helping to
    realize the continent's great human and economic potential.
        From the Red Sea to the Atlantic Ocean, African states are
    embroiled in civil and regional wars that are taking a horrifying toll
    on innocent civilians. It would be difficult to overestimate the
    destructiveness of these conflicts; and we are engaged in intensive
    efforts to resolve each of them.
        Just two days ago, with strong U.S. support, Sierra Leone's
    President Kabbah and rebel leader Sankoh signed a cease-fire agreement,
    a step toward ending the brutal fighting there.
        But at the same time, we are mindful of the fact that conflict is
    not the only force shaping the future of the 700 million people in the
    region.
        An increasing number of Africa's leaders now understand that the
    continent's future prosperity depends on trade and foreign investment.
    They are working to create a better environment for doing business, by
    privatizing state-run enterprises, revamping commercial codes, and
    adopting sound fiscal policies. As a result, overall economic growth in
    Africa has averaged nearly 4 percent over the past four years, and our
    exports to the region have risen by an average of more than 11 percent
    per year over the same period.
        The United States has a direct stake in seeing this economic
    progress continue. It means better business opportunities for American
    companies. And it means that African nations could be stronger allies,
    and less dependent on international assistance, in the decades to come.
        So, once again, I urge Congress to pass the African Growth and
    Opportunity Act. This trade measure would provide essential support for
    the process of economic reform across the continent, and expand our
    trade with one of the largest untapped markets in the world.
        Mr. Chairman, I want to draw your attention to our efforts in
    Sudan, a country that remains one of our diplomatic and humanitarian
    priorities. With your support, the United States provided more than
    $150 million to Sudanese relief last year, and has already committed
    over $130 million for fiscal year 1999. Operation Lifeline Sudan is now
    the largest food delivery program in history, having surpassed the
    Berlin Airlift. Thanks to this remarkable effort, the immediate crisis
    which endangered the lives of over two million people in the southern
    part of that country has largely abated.
        But long-term food security in Sudan depends on ending that
    country's civil war. The international donor community, with our active
    participation and support, is working to revitalize the negotiating
    process. Kenya has appointed a special envoy to focus full-time on the
    process. And with American assistance, a secretariat will be set up for
    the talks in Nairobi, under the auspices of the Intergovernmental
    Authority on Development.
        In Africa, as elsewhere, we can have the greatest impact where we
    have partners. For that reason, it is essential for us to continue our
    strong support for the positive developments in Africa's two anchor
    states, South Africa and Nigeria.
        Five years ago, Nelson Mandela was elected as the first president
    of a free South Africa. Next month, he will step down; the voters will
    select a new parliament; and that parliament will choose Mandela's
    successor. Mandela's wisdom will of course be missed; there are few
    leaders in world history as beloved; but the fact that this transfer of
    power is taking place so smoothly marks yet another step forward in
    South Africa's transition to normal democratic governance.
        One of the great accomplishments of the Mandela administration has
    been to reduce the government's role in the economy and promote private
    sector investment and competition. But in many ways the job of building
    South Africa's democratic institutions is just beginning. And while
    political violence has receded, violent crime of a more prosaic nature,
    including organized crime, has become a major problem.
        The task of building true democracy in Nigeria is even more
    daunting, but that country's political situation has improved
    dramatically over the past year. In February, Nigeria chose its first
    elected president in over fifteen years. The elections were far from
    perfect--but the people's choice was clear.
        President Clinton, Treasury Secretary Rubin and I met with
    President-elect Obasanjo on March 30th, and assured him that we will
    provide strong support for Nigeria's transition to democracy.
        For the future of the continent, the stakes could not be higher.
    Nigeria has the largest population in sub-Saharan Africa and is a
    dominant cultural, economic, and military power. A successful
    democracy, coupled with a revived economy, could be an engine for
    positive change throughout the region.
        Nigeria, South Africa and most other African nations have long and
    difficult journeys ahead. They will need to persevere in spite of the
    setbacks and discouragements that are bound to come along the way. The
    United States needs to stay the course as well. We should continue to
    provide essential assistance to those who are working to open markets,
    and strengthen civil society, representative democracy, and the rule of
    law. This is the strategic approach that drives our policy and for
    which I ask the support of this Subcommittee and the Congress.
                        global opportunities and threats
        Mr. Chairman, to protect the security and prosperity of our
    citizens, we are engaged in every region on every continent. Many of
    our initiatives and concerns are directed, as I have discussed, at
    particular countries or parts of the world. Others are more
    encompassing and can best be considered in global terms.
    Protecting American security
        The first of these is our strategy for ensuring the fundamental
    security of our citizens and territory--a challenge that differs
    substantially from the past.
        The risks of East-West confrontation have been sharply reduced, and
    for that we remain grateful. But we face a variety of other dangers,
    some fueled by technology's advance; some by regional rivalry; some by
    naked ambition; and some by envy, resentment or outright hate.
        During the past year alone, we have witnessed terrorist attacks
    against two of our embassies in Africa, the testing of longer-range
    missiles by North Korea and Iran, periodic threats from Saddam Hussein,
    and nuclear explosions in South Asia that fueled regional tensions and
    challenged the global nonproliferation regime.
        The future promises scant relief from such perils. In response,
    President Clinton has outlined plans for strengthening our military,
    revitalizing our alliances, and preparing American communities for
    possible terrorist strikes.
        Defending America requires both the capacity and the will to use
    force when necessary. But we must also use diplomacy vigorously, to
    bolster the forces of law and prevent weapons of mass destruction and
    the missiles that deliver them from falling into the wrong hands.
        The economic crisis in Russia and elsewhere in the New Independent
    States (NIS) adds urgency to the need for effective action. Thousands
    of scientists with WMD expertise are facing increased temptations to
    sell their know-how to terrorists or rogue states. And the risks of
    illicit weapons trafficking are likewise on the rise.
        To address these growing proliferation risks, the President is
    seeking a total of $250 million in foreign operations funds this year
    for the State Department programs under the multi- agency Expanded
    Threat Reduction (ETR) Initiative. Building upon the far-sighted Nunn-
    Lugar program, we seek to engage weapons scientists to prevent
    proliferation, halt smuggling, and enhance export controls.
        These programs are carefully targeted at the highest areas of
    proliferation risk in a time of unprecedented transition and continued
    uncertainty. The State Department administers them with the highest
    possible standards of care and oversight. We do this with direct input
    and participation from a broad range of agencies to ensure that
    relevant policy, technical and intelligence assessments are all taken
    into consideration.
        We ask your support in order to sustain these high standards--for
    we must do everything we can to keep Russian nuclear, chemical, and
    biological expertise out of the wrong hands.
        This year we are requesting $20 million to fund the CTBT
    Preparatory Commission, which will continue to lay the human and
    technical foundation for the Treaty's entry into force. Even before the
    test ban is in place, these funds will help build up the international
    verification system that will help us deter, detect and closely monitor
    nuclear explosive testing around the globe.
        We should not lag behind in realizing the benefits of a Treaty we
    led in negotiating and signing. I strongly urge the Senate to approve
    the CTBT this summer, so that we can participate fully in the first
    meeting of Treaty parties that will take place this fall.
        I also ask your support for our proposed $43 million voluntary
    contribution to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). These
    funds will help the Agency continue enhancing the safeguards that
    permit it to verify compliance, worldwide, with the Nuclear Non-
    Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
        Our request this year includes $55 million for the Korean Energy
    Development Organization (KEDO). This increase of $20 million will
    significantly reduce KEDO's standing debt and allow us to meet a
    critical national security obligation.
        The Agreed Framework succeeded in freezing North Korea's dangerous
    plutonium production and separation facilities at Yongbyon. Thanks to
    the Framework, those facilities are now under rigorous IAEA monitoring,
    and their spent fuel--which could contain several bombs' worth of
    weapons-grade plutonium--is now in safe storage. If the Framework is
    fulfilled, those nuclear facilities will eventually be dismantled and
    this nuclear fuel shipped out of North Korea.
        Meanwhile, as long as North Korea is abiding by the terms of the
    Framework, our support for KEDO remains a vital investment in our
    national security. I appeal to the members of this Subcommittee not to
    let a lack of funding cause the Framework's demise.
        All told, we are requesting $231 million for our Nonproliferation,
    Anti-terrorism, Demining and Related Programs Account (NADR) in fiscal
    year 2000. These funds support our global export control assistance
    efforts; and in the New Independent States, $10 million in NADR funds
    supports nonproliferation activities under the Expanded Threat
    Reduction Initiative.
        The NADR Account includes $40 million--a proposed increase of $5
    million--for America's commitment to global humanitarian demining.
    Especially in light of our inability, at present, to join the Ottawa
    Convention, maintaining U.S. leadership through the Demining 2010
    initiative is a practical, political and moral imperative.
        NADR funding also enables us to work with friendly countries in a
    multi-year, multi- faceted global campaign to deter and defend against
    terrorist attacks; and to pursue, prosecute and punish the criminals
    who commit them. This is a paramount national interest for which we are
    requesting $43 million to fund specific programs.
        Our programs against terrorism protect Americans working and
    traveling abroad. Our Anti-terrorism Assistance (ATA) program enhances
    the skills of security officials in selected countries so that they may
    be more effective partners in preventing and punishing terrorist acts.
    We have launched new training initiatives to counter terrorist fund-
    raising and the potential use of weapons of mass destruction.
        The increased funds we are seeking this year will also help fund
    new initiatives to interdict terrorists and detect explosives at the
    borders of developing countries. And our request will help expand the
    ATA training beyond the traditional areas of the Middle East and Latin
    America into Africa and the New Independent States.
        Mr. Chairman, our diplomacy and our programs play a key role in the
    unrelenting campaign to combat terrorism. I am convinced that this
    effort saves American lives. And I know that it merits the full support
    of this Subcommittee.
        Finally, I also urge this Subcommittee to approve the President's
    Budget Request of $3.43 billion in Foreign Military Financing (FMF).
    This program enables key friends and allies to meet their defense needs
    by financing acquisition of U.S. military articles, services and
    training. FMF also promotes our interests by binding our coalitions,
    cementing our military relationships and enhancing interoperability
    with U.S. forces.
    Sustaining American prosperity
        A second overarching goal of our foreign policy is to promote a
    healthy world economy in which American genius and productivity receive
    their due.
        The American economy is strong today because of the energy,
    innovation, and skills of the American people. We have the most
    competitive economy on Earth. Our foreign policy cannot take credit for
    that; but we can and do support it.
        Since President Clinton took office, we have negotiated more than
    240 trade agreements, including the Uruguay Round and agreements on
    information technology, basic telecommunications and financial
    services. This matters because trade has been a significant contributor
    to the sustained economic growth we have enjoyed these past six years.
    Currently, more than twelve million U.S. jobs are supported by exports,
    and these are good jobs, paying--on the average--13-16 percent more
    than non-trade related positions.
        This Subcommittee can help us to build on this record by supporting
    the President's funding request for agencies such as the Export-Import
    Bank, the Trade Development Agency, and the Overseas Private Investment
    Corporation, which help our business people find new markets abroad.
        During the past decade, the trend towards more open rules of
    investment and trade has helped to spur record economic expansion and
    raise living standards in much of the world. Over the past two years,
    however, the financial crisis applied the brakes to many national
    economies and plunged a number, particularly in East Asia, into
    reverse. Although the U.S. economy has remained healthy, important
    sectors such as agriculture, aircraft and steel have been adversely
    affected by shrinking export markets and increased pressure from low-
    priced imports.
        We have responded on two levels. We have rigorously enforced our
    laws against unfair trade.
        And more broadly, President Clinton has come forward with proposals
    designed to restore world economic growth, reform international
    financial institutions, ensure fair treatment for U.S. workers and
    firms, and assist our trading partners in improving the management of
    their financial sectors.
        For example, we have encouraged Japan to implement reforms that
    would help make that country once again an engine of economic
    expansion. We have joined forces with the World Bank and the IMF to
    prevent the financial contagion from spreading further and to meet
    urgent humanitarian needs. And we have made it clear, in promoting
    trade and supporting the role of international financial institutions,
    that serious consideration must be given to environmental and worker
    standards.
        Unfortunately, there are no quick or simple solutions to the
    problems many countries now face. Success in the global economy
    requires sound fiscal and monetary policies, transparent financial
    systems, good governance and the rule of law. It is no accident that
    nations with these attributes have fared best during the crisis.
        Nations with deeper problems must take the tough steps required to
    develop broad-based and accountable democratic institutions that will
    earn investor confidence and engender public support. It is in our
    interest to help nations that are prepared to undertake these reforms
    and we ask your support in doing so.
        Accordingly, I urge you to approve the President's request for
    $1.395 billion in fiscal year 2000 for Multilateral Development Banks,
    which include the World Bank and five regional development banks. And I
    ask you to endorse our request for $143 million for the U.S. annual
    contribution and arrears payment to the Global Environmental Facility
    (GEF).
        The multilateral banks lend and invest in developing economies
    where risks are too high for private financing alone and where leverage
    is needed to spur such financing. Bank policies reflect U.S. priorities
    by stressing the need for borrowing countries to implement financial
    sector reforms, fight corruption, observe sound environmental and labor
    standards, and create a favorable climate for investment.
        In recent years, trade and private sector development have played
    increasing roles in efforts to foster development and raise living
    standards around the world. But this does not diminish the critical
    role played by professional development organizations such as USAID.
        The heart of our bilateral development assistance is contained in
    three USAID accounts, for which we are requesting a total of $1.848
    billion, up slightly from last year's appropriation.
        The Development Assistance account supports basic economic growth,
    agricultural progress, environmental stewardship, family planning,
    democracy and good governance.
        USAID's Child Survival and Disease Programs Fund is designed to
    save and enrich people's lives through improved maternal and child
    health and nutrition, lower HIV transmission, wider access to health
    services and basic educational opportunities.
        Finally, the Development Fund for Africa covers a broad range of
    urgently-needed services, and includes this year an expanded Africa
    Food Security Initiative and a $30 million request for the Africa
    Education for Development and Democracy Initiative.
        When we contribute to multilateral efforts to promote sustainable
    development, we leverage as much as eight or ten times our national
    contribution to support goals we share.
        This year, we have requested $80 million in contributions to the
    United Nations Development Program (UNDP). For years, UNDP has been at
    the forefront of helping developing countries establish democratic
    institutions, market economies and basic human rights.
        The need for UNDP's work remains especially strong among African
    countries struggling against the plagues of conflict, poverty and
    disease; and among Asia's poorer nations. It also plays a major role in
    supporting women worldwide as they strive to gain more equal access to
    the levers of political and economic power.
        Like UNDP, UNICEF plays an important role in countries suffering or
    recovering from the devastation caused by civil or international
    conflict. Around the world, UNICEF helps protect children--a society's
    most vulnerable members and its hope for the future. We are requesting
    $101 million for UNICEF for fiscal year 2000.
        Mr. Chairman, one of the most inspiring ways this account helps
    make a difference in the lives of men and women in this country and
    around the world is through its support for the Peace Corps. The Peace
    Corps has been one of this country's most successful programs
    overseas--both in bringing skills and knowledge to those who
    desperately need them, and in gaining goodwill for our country.
    President Clinton's request for $270 million in funding will put us
    well along the path to our goal of having 10,000 volunteers serving
    overseas early in the next century.
    Fighting international crime and narcotics
        A third global objective of our foreign policy is to fight and win
    the struggle against the hydra-headed evil of international crime.
        Drug cartels and other international crime gangs threaten us every
    day, whether we are pursuing business opportunities overseas or going
    about our daily business here at home. Crime and corruption also pose
    major threats to democracy and economic reform in Latin America,
    Africa, and the former Soviet Union.
        President Clinton spoke to these dangers last year when he unveiled
    a comprehensive strategy to integrate all facets of the federal
    response to international crime. Led by our Bureau of International
    Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, the State Department is a key
    partner in this effort, which is designed to extend the first line of
    defense against crime far beyond U.S. borders.
        To this end, we are working with other nations around the globe to
    train police, prosecutors and judges, seize drug assets, help farmers
    find alternatives to illicit crops, expose and close front companies,
    halt money laundering, track criminals and bring smugglers of
    contraband to justice.
        In our own hemisphere, these comprehensive efforts have paid clear
    dividends. In 1998, coca cultivation in South America declined to its
    lowest level in a decade. Peru has cut cultivation by more than 55
    percent in three years, and Bolivia has made impressive progress as
    well. Colombia remains a major challenge, but we are working to step up
    our efforts there.
        In Africa, Nigeria is the key, and for the first time in years, the
    prospects are encouraging. It is essential, however, that we have the
    flexibility in administering our anti-narcotics and crime programs to
    devote sufficient resources to the continent. A significant portion of
    the heroin interdicted in the U.S. is traceable to African smuggling
    organizations.
        In Asia, we are handicapped by the repressive nature of the
    authorities in Burma and Afghanistan--the world's two leading producers
    of heroin. We are doing our best to address the problem by working
    through neighboring states, regional organizations and the United
    Nations.
        In Russia, Ukraine, and the other New Independent States, we
    continue to focus our efforts on helping legislators to draft
    fundamental anti-crime and corruption laws, and on law enforcement
    training. We are also negotiating agreements that will allow our own
    law enforcement officers to cooperate more effectively with their
    counterparts in these countries.
        There are no final victories in the fight against international
    crime, but--as our increased budget request of $295 million for this
    year reflects--we are pushing ahead hard. Our purpose, ultimately, is
    to create a tightly woven web of agreements, laws, inspectors, police
    and judicial power that will deny drug kingpins and other criminals the
    space they need to operate.
    Promoting democracy, human rights and rule of law
        American policy is to promote democracy, the rule of law, religious
    tolerance and human rights.
        We believe, and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights affirms,
    that ``the will of the people . . . expressed in periodic elections''
    should be the basis of government everywhere. We are working actively
    to promote the observation of this principle around the world.
        Earlier in this statement, I mentioned some of the specific
    programs we use to aid democratic transitions, support free and fair
    elections and help democratic forces build civil society. These include
    our Freedom Support Act and SEED programs and the assistance provided
    by USAID's Democracy and Governance Center.
        These programs reflect our ideals and serve our interests.
        When we support democratic forces, we are aiding our natural
    partners and helping to forge an ever-expanding community of democratic
    nations that can work together to strengthen democracy where it exists
    and lend support to those who seek it where it does not.
        We know from experience that democratic governments tend to be more
    successful at preventing conflicts and coping with the turbulence of
    the global market than regimes that do not answer to the people.
        Our support for the right to democracy is part of our broader
    effort to elevate global standards of human rights and respect for the
    rule of law. Our goal is to enter the 21st Century moving ahead in
    these areas, not just settling for the status quo.
        Accordingly, the United States will continue to support democratic
    ideals and institutions however and wherever we can effectively do so.
        We will continue to advocate increased respect for human rights,
    vigorously promote religious freedom and firmly back the international
    criminal tribunals for Rwanda and the Former Yugoslavia.
        We will support efforts to help women gain fair access to the
    levers of economic and political power, work with others to end the
    pernicious trafficking in women and girls, and renew our request for
    Senate approval of the Convention to Eliminate All Forms of
    Discrimination Against Women.
        And as the President has pledged, we will continue working through
    the International Labor Organization to raise core labor standards, and
    to conclude a treaty that would ban abusive child labor.
                       providing humanitarian assistance
        This year, we have requested $660 million for Migration and Refugee
    Assistance and $30 million to replenish the U.S. Emergency Refugee and
    Migration Assistance Fund. The total is a $20 million increase from
    fiscal year 1999 appropriated levels. We have also requested $220
    million for international disaster assistance.
                                   conclusion
        Fifty years ago, only a short distance from where we are now,
    President Harry Truman delivered his first and only inaugural address.
        In what came to be known as the Four Point speech, he challenged
    Democrats and Republicans alike to lend a hand to those struggling for
    freedom and human rights; to continue programs for world economic
    recovery; to strengthen international organizations; and to draw on our
    country's vast expertise to help people help themselves in the fight
    against ignorance, illness and despair.
        Today, we are summoned to meet similar responsibilities in a far
    different time--and to honor principles that will endure for all time.
        In so doing, we must heed the central lesson of this century, which
    is that problems abroad, if left unattended, will all too often come
    home to America.
        We Americans draw immense strength from the fact that we know who
    we are and what we believe. We have a purpose. And like the farmer's
    faith that seeds and rain will cause crops to grow, it is our faith
    that if we are true to our principles, we will succeed.
        Let us, then, do honor to that faith. In this final year of this
    turbulent century, let us assume, not with complaint, but welcome, the
    leader's role established by our forebears.
        And by living up to the heritage of our past, let us fulfill the
    promise of our future--and enter the new century free and united,
    prosperous and at peace.
        To that mission, I pledge my own best efforts, and respectfully
    solicit both your wise counsel and support.
        Thank you very much. And now I would be pleased to respond to your
    questions.

                      funds available for the 150 account

        Senator McConnell. Thank you, Madam Secretary.
        With regard to the amount of funds available for the 150
    account, as you know, I have consistently supported your view
    on that up to and including prior to your coming to office in
    1995, when we were trying to get more funds for the 150 account
    in the initial budget of the new Republican Congress in those
    days.
        But with regard to this year's allocation, the allocation
    this subcommittee has been given in the Senate is roughly what
    we ended up with last year. So it is my plan, even though I,
    like you, would like to have a little more, it is my plan to go
    forward with about the roughly $12.5 billion allocation this
    subcommittee has been given in the Senate. I understand it is
    lower than that in the House.
        Are you advocating, then, that we break the budget caps
    from the 1997 budget deal? Is that what you are saying?
        Secretary Albright. I think, Mr. Chairman, that there are
    ways to do this without doing that. All I can tell you is that
    if we go forward with this, let me just say what will happen.
        Senator McConnell. I share your view that this is an
    inadequate amount of money. I want to know whether you are
    advocating we break the budget caps of the 1997 budget deal.
        Secretary Albright. Mr. Chairman, I believe that it is very
    important to support the President's request and I do not
    believe it is appropriate for me to get into the discussion of
    the budget process.
        Senator McConnell. Well, that is fine. But the problem, as
    you know, the political problem is the President has suggested
    that any effort to encroach on the surplus is in effect taking
    money from Social Security, which presents a dilemma for the
    Congress in adequately funding programs, because conceivably if
    you look at our account it could be said that we are taking
    money away from Social Security in order to send it overseas.
    So it is a delicate political problem.
        Nevertheless, we are going to proceed in this subcommittee
    with our allocation, which is roughly what we had last year.
        Turning to Kosova----
        Secretary Albright. Mr. Chairman, could I just make a point
    on this?
        Senator McConnell. Yes.
        Secretary Albright. In the preparation of the President's
    budget there was a system worked out whereby these requests,
    including the one for 150, was within the budget caps. So we do
    think that it is possible to fund fully the President's request
    and stay within the budget cap.
        Senator McConnell. Well, there is substantial disagreement
    on that. So why do we not just move on.
        I share your frequent characterization of Milosevic. In
    fact, it may have been the President or it was at least someone
    in the administration who likened Milosevic to Hitler. It leads
    me to ask, in terms of how we end this conflict, and we will
    talk about beyond the conflict in a minute, since we are
    dealing here with by descriptions of those in the
    administration a modern day Hitler, is it our plan to negotiate
    with this particular person to end the war, and do you expect
    him then thereby to still be there when the war is over?
        Secretary Albright. Let me say that it is important to
    restate the objectives of what we are doing, and the objectives
    are simply stated, not easily achieved, but simply stated,
    which is that the refugees must be able to go home, that the
    Serb forces, military and paramilitary and special police, have
    to come out, and that there has to be an international force
    that is, with NATO at its core, that is able to go in.
        That is based not on theology or ideology, but on facts,
    because the refugees will not go back if the Serb forces are
    there and if there are not Americans in an international force,
    and the Americans have to be part of a NATO command structure.
        We believe that the Serb people themselves are being
    exploited by Milosevic and that they are being isolated because
    of his policies, and they need to understand that a democratic
    Serbia would be welcomed back into the international community
    and that Milosevic is someone who clearly has directed a great
    deal of what has happened and that there is a legal process, as
    you know, through the War Crimes Tribunal that is looking into
    his complicity.
        As far as negotiating with him, the question is how you
    come to the end of this. I believe we should not negotiate with
    him, but that does not mean that we should not have contact
    with him, but, as you know, former Prime Minister Chernomyrdin
    has been in Belgrade. Others have spoken with him. I do not
    believe that negotiation is appropriate.
        On the other hand, an agreement by him is something that
    may be necessary.
        Senator McConnell. So the answer to my question is that in
    all likelihood, whether the U.S. negotiates the agreement
    directly or whether it is done by people with whom we are
    consulting, that this person that we have likened to Hitler is
    in all likelihood going to be the negotiator on the Serb side
    and still in power when the conflict ends?
        Secretary Albright. I restated our objectives of the war
    very simply in order to make a point, that it is important for
    us to understand that we do not support him. We believe that he
    has done all the things that I have stated. We believe that
    Serbia would be better off without him. But I think we have to
    stay very focused on what the objectives of this campaign are,
    and that is to break the back of his military so that the grip
    that they have over Kosova can be ended and the terror that
    they have inflicted will cease.
        We believe that what he has done is isolate the people of
    Serbia because they deserve better, and ultimately it certainly
    would be better for all if they were able to be run
    democratically and be able to be part of what I hope we will
    talk about as the future of the Balkans.
        Senator McConnell. Well, I think the answer to my question
    is that Milosevic is likely to still be in power when this
    ends, which gets to the question of what will the deal be,
    which you alluded to, and let us get to that. I share your
    definition of what victory is. Victory would be Kosovars back
    in Kosova, international force in, and all Serb MUP and VG out.
        Which leads me to the word ``all.'' Now, what I understand
    is that the word ``all'' has somehow mysteriously disappeared
    in the discussions that are going on, which presumably are
    being headed by the Russians. Therefore I want to ask you if a
    successful conclusion to this conflict could include some
    either MUP or VJ still in Kosova?
        Secretary Albright. We have said that they all have to come
    out. Mr. Chairman, what is going on here is that we have some
    principles that were adopted by the G-8, of which the Russians
    are a part, and we are systematically trying to bring the
    Russians closer to our views. They signed--the NATO summit
    communique has greater precision than the G-8 principles do,
    and part of what I believe we are doing quite successfully is
    systematically moving the Russians so that they see the value
    of what it is that we are proposing, which goes back again to
    the basic points that I said had to be what our victory
    amounted to.
        We think that they all have to come out. That has been our
    position. There is discussion about whether at some phase some
    Serbs would be allowed to be somewhere around some of their
    holy sites. But the conditions that the NATO summit has laid
    down is that all should come out.
        Senator McConnell. Well, regardless of what our position
    is, let me rephrase the question. Could U.S. participation in
    bombing strikes stop and there still be no plan for the removal
    of all both Yugoslav military and police from Kosova?
        Secretary Albright. We have said that the bombing campaign
    will continue until he has accepted the five NATO conditions,
    which includes the fact that they all have to come out.
        Senator McConnell. The word ``all'' is still a part of
    that?
        Secretary Albright. Yes.
        And that what--and he has to also have shown that
    verifiable amount of them are coming out. So there are the five
    conditions and then we have to see a movement of their forces
    coming out before we would stop.
        Senator McConnell. I want to explore one other area.
    Senator Specter is anxious to get in here, but I have to get to
    beyond the war. Assuming this ends along the terms you have
    outlined some time soon, as we discussed briefly last night, I
    would like for you to give me some indication of what the
    administration has in mind in terms of recovery and
    reconstruction, long-term foreign assistance relationships
    between the United States and the front line countries, with
    whom we now have obviously a much closer relationship than we
    used to have, and Kosova, and for that matter--I am assuming
    this would be the case only with new leadership in Yugoslavia--
    but with Yugoslavia as well?
        Secretary Albright. Yes. Well, first of all, I think that
    as we have looked at that region, it is really the missing
    puzzle for Europe. I mean, if you think about what happened
    after the war with Western Europe, what we have been able to do
    with Central and Eastern Europe since the end of the cold war,
    I think now looking at the Balkan Peninsula as a whole is very
    important.
        I will not go through all the problems there because we all
    know them, but I think basically we need to take a different
    look at them. We have some very important goals and the
    President enunciated some of them in a speech that he has
    given. Again, I do not want to take up too much time with this,
    but I think basically it is a way to try to see the countries
    within the Balkans working with each other, supporting each
    other, looking at having common technical activities together,
    dealing with their electrical grids or their roads, a lot of
    functional programs that we have already looked at and want to
    continue, and try to move the whole peninsula towards democracy
    and a free market system.
        There are several initiatives that are already out there
    and we are trying to work with the Europeans in order to be
    able to have a concerted plan. There is a NATO Southeast
    European initiative in which NATO is going to, obviously, play
    a major role in terms of the stabilization of the region.
        Some of these countries are already members of the
    Partnership for Peace and they are part of the Euro-Atlantic
    community and they are working now together. We met with all of
    them during the Washington summit. What I think everybody was
    heartened by was their determination to work together and to
    work with us.
        I also have met any number of times with the foreign
    ministers of the front line states. They want to be helped, but
    they also want to give their own input. So we have asked them
    to create working groups among themselves in order to be able
    to join very closely----
        Senator McConnell. Are we taking the lead on this? Is NATO
    taking the lead on it? Who is taking the lead on that?
        Secretary Albright. We are taking the lead on the
    stabilization part of this through our leadership in NATO, but
    we are trying very hard to get others to do this with us. I
    think we have a double kind of goal here. One is we want this
    to be stable, the United States plays a major role, and at the
    same time we want the Europeans to assume their responsibility.
    So there is that part.
        We are obviously concerned about the economic aspects of
    this. Here the World Bank and the European Union are taking a
    lead in this. There was a special meeting of governments and
    international agencies in Washington on April 27 which reviewed
    how the international community is responding to this and
    decided that the European Commission and the World Bank should
    coordinate the needs assessment and the modalities for
    assistance. We are going to be working with them on a regular
    basis to ensure that this is truly efficient, and once it is
    fully functioning this mechanism will give the international
    community the confidence in order then to have the tasks to get
    donors, to get economic analysis, and ensuring conditions of
    support.
        The World Bank is currently doing a needs assessment and we
    are plugging into them through an integrated working group that
    we have at the State Department.
        Then there is the stability package----
        Senator McConnell. Let me ask you, when are we going to get
    an idea of the price tag and what our participation in this is
    likely to be?
        Secretary Albright. We have pushed very hard to try to get
    a price tag ourselves, and I am aware, especially since our
    conversation yesterday, of your interest in this. I cannot give
    you a number now because it would be wrong. What is happening
    is that this is an ongoing analysis that, as I said, the World
    Bank is working on and we are working very urgently, as are the
    Europeans.
        What I would like to do is to bring back some of the people
    that we have in our task force to sit down with you and really
    go over it. But this is a real time thing.
        Senator McConnell. Well, we need to do it soon, because you
    and I both know, just on the humanitarian front, we do not have
    anywhere near enough money to see these refugees through next
    winter just on the short term basis. And there is not any
    question that this is going to have a major impact on this
    year's foreign operations budgets. So we will come back to that
    in a minute.
        Senator Specter.

                   opening statement of senator arlen specter

        Senator Specter. I had wanted to ask you a number of
    questions, Madam Secretary, but I have to leave momentarily, so
    I will use just a minute on, in effect, an opening statement.
        I am glad to hear you respond that the United States does
    not intend to negotiate with President Milosevic, and you may
    have sliced it exactly right in having somebody else do what
    has to be done. But I hope the United States will retain its
    posture of pressing to have Milosevic tried as a war criminal.
    Justice Arborough was in town a couple of weeks ago and
    outlined a need for $18 million. We supplemented your request
    for $5 million by $13 million more and that is in the bill
    which should be approved by the Senate today. But I think it is
    very important to retain our status to press hard to try
    Milosevic as a war criminal.
        A subject which I will not ask a question on because I have
    to leave, as I say, momentarily, but just to make a comment. I
    know how perseverant the President and you have been on the
    Mideast and with the new government I know you will be moving
    very promptly, not only with the Palestinian track but also
    with the Syrian-Israeli track, which I think is very fertile
    for development at this time.
        The one question which I will ask you is the status as to
    the military now. You have Britain pressing for ground troops,
    you have the President saying it is a possibility, you have
    Germany now saying no. The air strikes have been going on now
    for almost 2 months.
        The question which I keep getting from my constituents is
    what was the strategy initially of the air strikes as the
    prospect of winning the war? Was our expectation that after the
    first wave, so-called, that Milosevic would concede? Or how did
    we expect to have an end to the military operation with only
    air strikes, as our strategy has been up to the present time?
        Secretary Albright. First of all, if I just might say, your
    support of the War Crimes Tribunal has been there from the very
    beginning and I appreciate it. We talked about it when I was at
    the United Nations and I think we have done a great--people did
    not even think that it would come into existence, and it has
    done a great job and we are supporting it.
        Senator Specter. You and I got $3 million before most
    people knew what the War Crimes Tribunal was.
        Secretary Albright. So I am very proud of our joint efforts
    on that, and we have been supporting them with information as
    we have been able to give it to them. I met with Justice
    Arborough and we will support her.
        On the Middle East, if I just might say this, is that we
    are obviously looking forward to getting back to the peace
    process and working all the tracks of it. But I think we have
    to give Prime Minister Elect Barak some time to get his
    government together. We have been in contact and we will
    continue to do so.
        I think that, what has not been evident enough in terms of
    the way that the propaganda machine has worked out of Serbia,
    is the amount of damage that has really been done by the
    military in terms of our bombings. I have lots of facts and
    figures, but you have to go. But at least a third of their
    military equipment has in some form or another been destroyed
    as a result of a very intensive air campaign.
        Senator Specter. Madam Secretary, I am going to have to go
    now. I will call you and we will talk about it.
        Secretary Albright. Very good. Thank you.
        Senator Specter. Thank you very much.
        Senator McConnell. Going back to Kosova again, Madam
    Secretary, as I indicated earlier, I share your
    characterization of Milosevic and that the President has used
    in his various statements over the last few months. For
    example, in your written statement you said: ``Milosevic has
    repeatedly engaged in violence and terror which poses a
    profound threat to the security and character of Europe.'' And
    you have repeated that in your extemporaneous remarks.
        As I indicated, I agree. So next week I am going to
    introduce legislation which will designate Serbia a terrorist
    state consistent with the terms of the Foreign Assistance Act.
    The advantage to this kind of legislation would be that it
    would preserve a wall of sanctions against the regime, it would
    enable ethnic Albanians to sue the government in U.S. courts
    for damages inflicted by the Serb forces over the past few
    years.
        I am curious as to whether you feel you could support
    listing Serbia as a terrorist state. It seems to me that in
    advocating this I am reflecting the views that have been
    expressed by both you and the President about this regime.
        Secretary Albright. Well, first of all, I would like to
    look at the legislation, obviously. But I am very appreciative
    of everything that you have said and done about this. I think
    our goal here is to try to get as strong an isolation of the
    regime as possible in order to show to the people what their
    future looks like with Milosevic.
        I feel very sorry for the Serb people, who are suffering
    and who are not being told the truth at all because of the
    propaganda machine that runs there constantly. And we have
    tried--as you know, there are a variety of sanctions regimes
    that are on Serbia, some multilateral through the United
    Nations, some that have been put on by the EU, some that have
    been put on by us.
        So I would like to look at your legislation, but I think in
    terms of the attempt to isolate them I fully support that.
        Senator McConnell. I am sure you agree that genocide is a
    terrorist act. I mean, I think it would probably meet the
    definition. And in fact you have the tools within existing law
    to make Serbia a terrorist state. What I will be doing with
    this legislation is encouraging you in that direction. It seems
    to me entirely consistent with the characterization of
    Milosevic by the administration from beginning, from the
    beginning until this moment, which, as I say again, I share.
        I agree with your characterization of him, and I think for
    us to have credibility in characterizing Milosevic the way we
    are we need to back that up, not only by ending this war in a
    way in which we can all conclude it was a victory, but also by
    following up with actions like putting Serbia on the list of
    terrorist states, and also the issue that you and Senator
    Specter were talking about: We need to be serious, not just
    talk, about the War Crimes Tribunal and this fellow being held
    accountable for these atrocities, which both you and the
    President and others in the administration have repeatedly
    reminded us of.
        I want to go back once again----
        Secretary Albright. Could I, Mr. Chairman, raise something
    on this?
        Senator McConnell. Yes.
        Secretary Albright. I know that you and I do have a
    difference of opinion on this, which is that you have been
    supporting the independence of Kosova.
        Senator McConnell. But I am also willing to accept
    autonomy. I mean, I think clearly what we want to do, both of
    us, I think is see the Kosovars back in Kosova in a livable
    situation, free from this kind of violence.
        Secretary Albright. The only reason I hesitate on what you
    are saying is that I think that we have to--while there are
    certain, obviously, aspects of Rambouillet that no longer hold,
    there were some concepts there that we need to stay with. I
    think that as we look at future legislation I would like to
    have the opportunity to look at things within the context of
    where we are and what we are trying to achieve.
        Senator McConnell. Well, on the Serbia terrorist state
    issue, that is going to move forward, and I would be interested
    in having your views some time in the near future about whether
    you think that would be helpful.
        I want to focus for a minute on Albania, which I guess is
    still being characterized as the poorest country in Europe.
    Certainly they have borne a huge share of the burden here. Do
    we have any--wholly aside from the regional reconstruction
    effort, which I expect I am going to hear, hopefully hear more
    from you about in the next few weeks, looking at Albania
    specifically and separately, what is your sense of our
    obligation to them in the wake of the conclusion of this war?
        Are you thinking of them only in a regional context or,
    since they are the poorest country and the ones that seem to be
    the most devastated by this, are we thinking of them
    specifically and, if so, how?
        Secretary Albright. We are obviously very concerned about
    Albania and actually even were before all this happened, as you
    know, because of their own political turmoil. We have
    considered how to assist them both politically and economically
    and we have worked with them very closely. There is a whole
    friends of Albania group, where the Italians have taken a large
    lead in that. We continue to work to stress the necessity of
    moving them forward both economically and politically, and pay
    a great deal of attention to them and will continue to do so.
        I have to get the figures for how much we are giving
    Albania specifically, but I can just assure you that we saw
    them as a country that needed a lot of American assistance in
    developing civil society and rule of law, a whole lot of
    problems that they were having economically, and we will
    provide almost $50 million this year to them.
        But in addition to that, Mr. Chairman, we see them as a
    country in itself that is important, and now during the refugee
    issue they have taken on the largest number of refugees. They
    also have done something that we consider very helpful. A lot
    of the displaced people are actually living with families and
    the families are being funded as host families. The President
    has been particularly--we talked about that this morning, is
    that it is a very good idea to actually give those families--
    they are getting a stipend now for hosting some of the Kosovar
    people and it is one way that actually gets money into the
    stream of the Albanian economy in addition to helping the
    people themselves, and lessens the pressure on the camps
    themselves.
        Senator McConnell. The other country that you and I had
    some conversations about is Macedonia, which clearly has been
    hugely impacted by all of this. As you and I have discussed on
    the phone previously, I put a request for security assistance
    for Macedonia on hold because I was concerned about the
    Macedonian military's treatment of minority Albanians. I have
    kept those funds on hold over your objection, as I am sure you
    will repeat in a moment.
        The reason for that is that the situation largely remains
    the same. I do not think we ought to arm and equip forces which
    have closed the borders, prevented relief workers and the press
    access to camps, denied refugees food, shelter and medical
    treatment, and engaged in forced relocations, beatings,
    harassments, and deportations.
        All of those things the Macedonian military has been
    engaged in. I understand concern about the stability of the
    Macedonian Government. It seems to me the kind of treatment
    that we would certainly condemn if it were going on in China,
    for example, or some other place is subject to equal
    condemnation here.
        In terms of this $6 million that you continue to implore me
    to release, which I am willing to continue to discuss, give me
    some hope here that this kind of thing has stopped, because I
    do not hear any indications that it has.
        Secretary Albright. Well, first of all, I think that we
    must agree on the fact that the stability of Macedonia is
    crucial to our overall plan for stability in the Balkans. They
    are an ethnically complicated country, to say the least, and
    they have had democratic elections where they have brought
    Albanians into the government. But despite that, there is a
    situation where obviously the Slavic backgrounded population or
    the Serbs have a preponderance.
        We were very concerned about exactly the kinds of things
    you have been talking about. I think that we need to understand
    the kind of pressure that the Macedonians were put under. The
    refugees were pouring over their borders. They had been
    prepared to take 20,000 refugees and now they have
    approximately 226,000 refugees, which is equivalent to well
    over 10 percent of their population, of an ethnic group that is
    the minority group within the country.
        We have made very clear to them that some of the things you
    were talking about were unacceptable, and we think we would say
    now that they are working to comply fully with the 1951
    Convention and Refugees and the subsequent protocols.
        Senator McConnell. If I could just interrupt, is there any
    evidence you can give me that any of the soldiers who have been
    involved in this kind of behavior have been disciplined?
        Secretary Albright. Yes, that has been raised. Also,
    different kinds of guards have been put in there now, and we
    have raised these issues with them. I spoke this morning again
    with Assistant Secretary Julia Taft to go over these issues and
    there is the general sense that they have improved tremendously
    and we are going to continue to work with them.
        But I think, sir, by withholding the funds we are not
    improving the situation. They are in a very delicate situation.
    So I would ask you to release the funds. We will continue to
    monitor this and we are working very hard to get the people out
    and into third countries, because this is a huge burden for a
    country such as Macedonia and it is very important to our
    overall stability.
        I have spoken with President Gligarof a number of times, as
    well as with the prime minister. Many of us have gone to visit,
    and we are keeping our eyes on them. If you could in fact
    remove--there are two holds, one on the $6 million ESF and then
    $7.4 million for FMF, which is older money that has been held
    up.
        So I do not know whether there is a way that you would like
    us to stay in touch with you on exactly what is going on.
        Senator McConnell. I want to see what evidence you have
    that any of these military and/or police forces who have been
    engaged in these abuses have been disciplined in any
    significant way. Whatever evidence you have I would appreciate
    your giving to staff.
        Let me just say, we are getting close to conclusion, but
    there is one Kentucky-specific issue that I want to raise with
    you, but I want to say one thing before going to that and then
    we can wrap up.
        It is my plan--I want to make sure there is no
    misunderstanding. It is my plan to work into this year's
    regular foreign operations appropriations bill some kind of
    assistance for Southeastern Europe. I would like to do that in
    consultation with you and receive whatever information from
    these European planning sessions there are.
        I know the bill is tight, but my bill is basically at the
    same level it was last year and we are going to go forward with
    it. I also understand it is a zero sum game and we are going to
    have to figure out where to take funds to begin to meet the
    needs of these Southeastern Europe countries with which we are
    going to have a longstanding relationship.
        So please consider me totally serious in saying that we
    need your help in trying to craft this, and some time soon,
    because I think it is the plan of our leader to have the
    foreign operations bill on the floor and through the Senate
    some time in June.
        Finally, let me turn to a Kentucky-specific matter that I
    would not raise with somebody of your level but for the
    horrendous nature of this situation. There was a physician in
    Paducah, Kentucky, convicted of molesting eight boys and served
    to a virtual lifetime sentence, who managed somehow to escape
    in 1978 and has been living, we believe, in Scandinavian
    countries most of the time since 1978.
        This first came to my attention a couple of weeks ago when
    I found out that the Czechs had arrested him at the airport in
    Prague and he was being held. Yesterday I found out--and I
    talked to the Czech ambassador about it, the ambassador to the
    United States, and spoke to people in your Department.
        Yesterday we found out that on May 5, 2 days before we got
    a commitment from people in your Department to aggressively
    pursue extradition, the criminal had been released.
        Obviously, this is way below your rank, but this is a
    serious serial molester who has been on the loose for 21 years.
    I am certainly not blaming you for what a Czech court did in
    releasing this individual. But I wonder what assistance, if
    any, or hope, if any, you can give me that we might be able to
    pursue this individual somehow. And why did it take so long for
    you all to get on this?
        Have you been informed by your people who is going on in
    this particular case?
        Secretary Albright. Mr. Chairman, as you said, we spoke
    about this and I understand your concern about this, and I
    looked into it promptly after you raised it with me yesterday.
    Last December this man was detained at our request while
    transitting Prague's airport and our embassy promptly filed an
    extradition request and he was placed into custody.
        A Czech court denied our request in late April, citing a
    legal discrepancy between the English and Czech versions of the
    1925 extradition treaty between our countries. The Czech
    justice ministry immediately appealed this decision and we
    provided additional information to support the appeal.
    Apparently there was a discrepancy in the words where they
    substituted the word ``girls'' rather than just ``minors.'' It
    is unbelievable.
        We were told that the embassy would be informed of the date
    of the appeal hearing. However, the ministry told us yesterday,
    as you have pointed out, that the hearing had in fact been held
    on May 5th and that Jones had been released on an earlier date.
        I cannot state this more strongly. We deeply regret that
    the Czechs relied on a legal technicality as a basis for
    refusing to extradite a convicted child molester who has proven
    a danger to society. On my instruction, Ambassador Shattuck
    protested to the Czech justice ministry this morning both the
    decision in this case and the Czech failure to notify us of the
    date of the appellate hearing. The ambassador also urged the
    justice minister to expedite conclusion of a more modern
    bilateral extradition treaty. That does not help you at the
    moment, but that has been pending since 1997.
        We have also informed Interpol of his release and will
    continue to pursue his extradition wherever he may surface.
        Senator McConnell. I appreciate your help on this. This
    individual is one of the most infamous criminals in the history
    of the western part of my State. As you can imagine, they are
    astonished that the Czech courts released him. I appreciate
    your update on that and it is something below your level. We
    are going to continue to be in contact with you on it.
        Hopefully, Interpol can apprehend this individual. He is,
    as I said, one of the most infamous criminals in the history of
    western Kentucky. Everybody in that part of the State, I now
    know, knows this guy's name. He has been on the loose for two
    decades and it is a huge issue.
        Thank you very much for your update on that.
        I am basically completed and I am sure you have plenty to
    do. But I get a note that Senator Leahy is on the way and I do
    not quite know what we should do. Senator Leahy's problem is he
    is managing a bill on the floor. In his defense, he is in an
    awkward situation.
        Madam Secretary, I think we want to thank you for being
    here. We appreciate your cooperation, and please, let us have
    some further conversations about our future relationship with
    Southeast Europe. Thank you very, very much for being here.
        Secretary Albright. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

                         Additional committee questions

        Senator McConnell. There will be some additional questions
    which will be submitted for your response in the record.
        [The following questions were not asked at the hearing, but
    were submitted to the Department for response subsequent to the
    hearing:]
                Questions Submitted by Senator Patrick J. Leahy
                          iraq humanitarian situation
        Question. The war in the Balkans has distracted attention from
    Iraq, but few days go by when our pilots are not firing on sites in the
    no-fly zone. At the same time, there are continuing concerns about the
    suffering of Iraqi civilians.
        I gather the administration has proposed that the UN Security
    Council consider lifting the ceiling on oil sales allowed under the
    oil-for-food program. However, some say this won't solve the problem
    because Iraq cannot even produce the amount of oil it is allowed to.
    How, other than lifting the ceiling on oil sales, could we do more to
    meet the humanitarian needs of Iraqi civilians?
        Answer. The United States is very concerned with the humanitarian
    situation in Iraq, and has consistently demonstrated more attention to
    the welfare of Iraqi civilians than has the regime of Saddam Hussein.
        We played a leading role in the creation of the United Nations oil-
    for-food program, the largest humanitarian assistance program in UN
    history. The oil-for-food program was recently extended for a further
    six-month period. Since the beginning of the program, over $3.4 billion
    worth of food, nearly $700 million worth of medicine, and over $400
    million worth of supplies for such things as water, sanitation,
    electricity and education projects, have been delivered to Iraq. UN
    statistics confirm that the avarage daily food ration has increased
    from 1,275 calories per day, before implementation of oil-for-food in
    1996 to 2,100 calories per day now.
        While Iraq has not been able in the past to meet the oil export
    ceiling, expanding oil exports and rising world oil prices may combine
    to allow Iraq to reach the ceiling.
        Iraq's poor record of cooperation with the oil-for-food program--
    including hoarding medical supplies that are urgently needed throughout
    the country, and ordering only a fraction of the targeted nutritional
    supplements needed to counter malnutrition--has been a recurring
    challenge. UN reports document the better functioning of the program in
    the North, where the UN has more control, than in the rest of the
    country.
        We have worked with other Security Council members to develop
    humanitarian provisions in the Dutch/UK draft resolution, which is
    presently being discussed by the Council. For example, the draft allows
    for increases in the oil export ceiling commensurate with humanitarian
    needs and calls on the Secretary General to ensure ``equitable and
    timely distribution'' of humanitarian goods. The draft resolution also
    increases revenues available for humanitarian goods and expedite's
    approval and delivery of oil-for-food goods. The draft ensures that
    Iraqi oil revenues remain under UN control.
        We will continue our discussions in the Security Council, with the
    twin goals of preventing the Iraqi government from escaping its
    obligations under Security Council's resolutions and ensuring that the
    innocent Iraqi population does not suffer unnecessarily as a result of
    Baghdad's policies.
                                    hiv/aids
        Question. I recently received a report about the U.S. Government's
    response to the global problem of HIV/AIDS, which was accompanied by a
    letter from you describing this devastating epidemic and the commitment
    of the U.S. Government to combat it. The U.S. is doing more than any
    country, but the administration has requested only $2 million above the
    fiscal year 1999 level, even though last year 15 percent more people
    were infected than the year before. Isn't this an example of rhetoric
    not matched by action?
        Answer. U.S. international donor assistance for HIV/AIDS surpasses
    other nations, and we hope to do more through the President's fiscal
    year 2000 budget request with an additional $2 million. The United
    States is working with other governments to raise the priority accorded
    to addressing HIV/AIDS at the highest levels. That means working with
    international organizations, such as UNAIDS, the World Bank, other
    donor nations and with developing nations themselves to look for ways
    to better utilize existing funds. In addition, we are taking steps
    within our own government to ascertain ways in which we can do more. We
    hope to work with Congress in the coming months to find ways,
    consistent with the President's budget request, to strengthen our
    effort to combat the HIV/AIDS pandemic in Africa in particular, and
    other regions, including Asia and the former Soviet Union.
                                wye supplemental
        Question. The Administration has requested $1.9 billion over three
    years to support implementation of the Wye River agreement. $100
    million for Jordan was included in the Emergency Supplemental. That
    leaves $1.8 billion. Given the spending caps and our low budget
    allocation, how does the Administration propose to pay for this?
        Answer. We view funding related to implementation of the Wye
    agreement as an extraordinary expense. Rather than requesting the
    funding in a onetime lump sum, it was structured as a supplemental
    request and advance appropriation over fiscal year 1999, 2000 and 2001.
    That structure allows us to meet our commitment to the peace process
    parties, while at the same time easing the burden on the budget. While
    only an initial $100 million was included in the Emergency
    Supplemental, we hope additional funding to support the Wye River
    agreement can be made available.
                                     rwanda
        Question. Was there ever any serious consideration given, either by
    the U.S. or other countries, to mounting an international force to stop
    the slaughter in Rwanda?
        Answer. Yes, serious consideration was given to this issue. Since
    the early 1990's the international community was actively involved in
    attempting to help resolve the civil war in Rwanda. In October 1993, a
    UN peacekeeping operation (UNAMIR) was put in place to monitor a peace
    agreement that had been negotiated between the Habyarimana government
    and the RPF rebels.
        Twelve Belgian peacekeepers were killed within hours of the April
    6, 1994 plane crash that killed President Habyarimana and touched off
    the genocide. Consequently, Belgium pulled out its peacekeeping
    contingent, reducing the size of the UNAMIR operation. On May 17, 1994
    the UNSC unanimously passed resolution 918 which authorized an increase
    of UNAMIR to 5,500 troops. UNAMIR's mandate was to protect endangered
    civilians and assist in humanitarian relief operations.
        However, for both logistic and policy reasons, no country stepped
    forward to volunteer troops for this operation. In late June 1994,
    France unilaterally deployed ``Operation Tourquoise''. By the end of
    June, however, much of the killing had run its course and by July 4 the
    advancing RPF had finished routing the interim government, effectively
    ending the genocide.
        When President Clinton traveled to Rwanda in March 1998, he
    acknowledged that the United States and the international community
    could have done more to bring an earlier end to the Rwandan tragedy.
    Through a number of programs and diplomatic initiatives we are working
    to ensure that genocide does not recur in the Great Lakes region of
    Africa.
                              turkish helicopters
        Question. The Turkish Government is considering awarding a U.S.
    company a $3.5 billion contract to purchase attack helicopters. The
    State Department has documented that Turkey has used similar
    helicopters to attack Kurdish villages and to transport troops who have
    then committed atrocities against Kurdish civilians. In January 1998,
    in a meeting with American NGO's, State Department officials indicated
    that such a sale would not be approved unless real progress was made on
    human rights in Turkey.
        It is more than a year later and there have been no significant
    improvements, at least not that I am aware of. If a U.S. company does
    win the contract, will the Administration continue to insist that there
    be progress on human rights?
        Answer. During our consultations with Congress prior to issuing
    marketing licenses for attack helicopters, we made clear that, if a
    U.S. company wins thecompetition, our sale approval would be based on
    our arms export control policy, which will include an evaluation of
    Turkey's progress on improving human rights. Our policy on the
    potential sale has not changed. Turkey's attack helicopter competition
    is still going on, and we do not yet know if a U.S. company will be
    chosen.
        In a December 1997 meeting with President Clinton, then Prime
    Minister Yilmaz said that his government intended to undertake
    significant and concrete human rights reforms. He further asserted that
    progress in this area was in Turkey's own best interest to enhance its
    democracy.
        The new government of Prime Minister Ecevit has made human rights
    and democracy a priority. It secured passage of a constitutional
    amendment to remove the military member of the state security courts
    and will seek legislation to facilitate holding civil servants
    accountable for their actions and to allow greater freedom of
    expression.
        Most recently, the government issued a decree on ``Respect for
    Human Rights.'' It announced that there will be no tolerance for human
    rights abuses by law enforcement officials. It increases oversight and
    calls on conduct surprise inspections of police stations, report
    results, and pursue legal action against perpetrators of torture and
    maltreatment. These will be important steps once implemented.
        We will continue to urge Turkey to make systemic human rights
    reforms.
                          u.s. assistance to colombia
        Question. The Administration, under pressure from a handful of
    Members of Congress, has greatly increased aid to the Colombian police.
    You are also planning to resume aid to the Colombian army, which has
    had real human rights problems, and which is a lot more interested in
    fighting the guerrillas than the drug traffickers. Colombia now is the
    third largest recipient of military aid, after Israel and Egypt. We
    also have military advisors there.
        Each year our military involvement in Colombia grows, and so does
    the amount of cocaine coming into the U.S. from Colombia. It seems to
    me that we are becoming increasingly drawn into a civil war. Where do
    you see us going in Colombia? If we keep sending all this military aid,
    do you have any idea what we can expect in a year, two years, five
    years?
        Answer. U.S. assistance to Colombia is provided to combat narcotics
    production and trafficking not counterinsurgency. The vast majority of
    our counternarcotics assistance is provided to the antinarcotics unit
    of the Colombian National Police. Our support for the army is based on
    its key counter drug role, particularly in interdicting precursor
    chemicals and securing areas for the aerial eradication of illegal
    crops. In accordance with U.S. law, all assistance to the Colombian
    armed forces is contingent upon human rights screening. No U.S.
    Government assistance is being provided to any unit of the Colombian
    military for which there is credible evidence of gross human rights
    violations by its members. None will be provided to such units, unless,
    as required by U.S. law, the Secretary of State determines that the
    Government of Colombia is taking steps to bring those responsible for
    gross human rights violations to justice.
        Although we provide counternarcotics assistance to the Colombian
    National Police and the Colombian military, the U.S. has no military
    advisors in country. The U.S. Embassy in Bogota, like many U.S.
    Embassies, has a Military Group that administers U.S. cooperation and
    assistance to Colombian security forces, as well as a Defense Attache,
    who is responsible for reporting on political military developments in
    Colombia. These are key members of the country team. In addition to
    regular Military. Group and Defense Attache personnel, at any given
    time, there may also be a highly variable number of other U.S. military
    personnel in country on routine training deployments and joint
    exercises.
        We strongly support President Pastrana's peace initiative.
    President Pastrana was elected on a peace platform. He was elected
    because the Colombian people overwhelmingly want peace and President
    Pastrana has made it his highest priority. We are encouraged by the
    announcement that formal negotiations between the government and the
    FARC are scheduled to begin July 7.
        A successful peace process would advance the overall U.S. agenda in
    Colombia and the Andean region by allowing a more effective
    counternarcotics effort, strengthening democratic institutions and
    practices and enhancing trade and investment opportunities for U.S.
    companies and individuals. The protection of and respect for human
    rights is integral to this process.
        It is unlikely that major progress can be made in Colombia's
    troubling human rights situation until the civil conflict is ended. The
    Colombian military has markedly improved its human rights performance
    in recent years. Unfortunately, at the same time the number of abuses
    committed by the guerrillas and, particularly, by the paramilitaries
    has increased markedly. We have urged the government to continue to
    take effective steps to end abuses and impunity within the armed
    forces. We welcomed President Pastranals recent decision to retire two
    general linked to paramilitary groups, and statements by President
    Pastrana and top military officials that they would not tolerate
    collaboration with the paramilitaries.
        In one to five years, we hope that enhanced counternarcotics
    assistance to Colombian security forces, both military and police, will
    lead to a decrease in cocaine production.
        In response to your question as to the short and medium term
    prospects for Colombia, we believe that the Colombian peace process,
    like other peace processes around the world, will take years to achieve
    a lasting settlement. We hope that a credible peace process will be
    well underway in the next year and within five years that significant
    progress toward national reconciliation will have taken place. In
    particular, we would like to see concrete steps taken now such as an
    immediate end to the practice of kidnapping and killing of innocent
    civilians. A successful peace process and a negotiated settlement offer
    the best and most viable solutions to Colombia's internal conflict. We
    believe that a successful peace negotiation could improve
    counternarcotics prospects, improve the human rights climate, promote
    economic growth, and ameliorate problems of social inequity.
                                 united nations
        Question. In retrospect, do you think we should have tried harder
    to seek UN support for taking military action in Kosova? How do you
    respond to the Secretary General's critical comments suggesting that
    the authority of the UN and the Security Council has suffered as a
    result?
        Answer. We did the right thing by standing up for self-government
    and against Milosevic's violations of international humanitarian law in
    a region important to U.S. and NATO interests. It would have violated
    our principles and undermined our leadership to have stood by.
        The UN was involved throughout. From early in 1998, it condemned
    Serb violence and repression; it found that the situation threatened
    peace and security in the region; and the Secretary General endorsed
    the core objectives we presented as a basis for resolving the conflict.
    A United Nations Security Council mandate for the use of force would
    have been desirable, but its absence neither prevented action by the
    international community, nor called into question the legitimacy of our
    efforts.
        The resolution of the crisis has placed the UN at the center of
    international efforts to provide self-government for all the people in
    Kosova. This is a great challenge for the UN and we are working closely
    with the Secretary General to see that the UN has the support and
    resources that it needs to succeed.
                                   east timor
        Question. Senator McConnell and I got $6.5 million included in the
    emergency supplemental for the U.N. Trust Fund to support the August
    ballot on East Timor's political status.
        During your March 1999 visit to Indonesia, you emphasized the need
    to disarm paramilitary forces and promote stability in East Timor.
    However, the violence and intimidation by the paramilitary continue
    unabated. Under current conditions a free and fair vote would be
    practically impossible. What is the Administration doing to increase
    pressure on the Indonesian government and military to rein in these
    groups and work with the U.N. to create a secure and stable environment
    for the vote? Do you plan to provide additional funding to support the
    August ballot?
        The U.N. is in the process of organizing an international police
    force to be placed in East Timor prior to the ballot. Is the
    Administration planning to contribute to that force?
        Answer. We are deeply concerned about the failure of the Indonesia
    government and military to rein in and disarm the civilian militias
    which have perpetrated most of the recent violence in East Timor,
    including a June 29 attack on a district headquarters of the UN Mission
    in East Timor (UNAMET). Secretary Cohen and I, as well as other senior
    USG and military officials have pressed this issue with senior
    Indonesian authorities and made it clear that the U.S. and
    international community expects Indonesia to fulfill its obligations
    for security and to create an atmosphere free of coercion ahead of the
    UN administered referendum on autonomy in late August. Our public
    statements on specific incidents have reinforced this message.
        We appreciate the $6.5 million which you and Senator Mcconnell
    included in the emergency supplemental to support the UNAMET effort.
    The State Department has reprogrammed an additional $3.5 million for
    further assistance to UNAMET. The U.S. is also fielding a 30-strong
    U.S. contingent for the UNAMET civilian police (CIVPOL) component and
    three U.S. military officers will join the UNAMET military liaison
    group. Several dozen other Americans are serving in key UNAMET
    positions under UN contracts or as volunteers.
                                     ______

               Questions Submitted by Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
                wye aid package for israel and the palestinians
        Question. The conclusion of Israel's elections raises considerable
    hope for resumption of the peace process between Israel and the
    Palestinians, including implementation of the Wye River Memorandum
    signed in Washington last fall. The Supplemental Appropriations bill
    which will be sent to the President shortly appropriately includes $100
    million in aid to Jordan to demonstrate our support for King Abdullah's
    efforts to confront his country's economic problems while continuing
    his father's steadfast commitment tot peace in the region. However, the
    Supplemental does not include the requested fiscal year 1999 funding
    for aide to Israel and the Palestinians. Do you share my concern that
    our failure to fund the full Wye aid package leaves the United States
    unprepared to fulfill President Clinton's commitment at Wye when the
    implementation resumes?
        Answer. Yes, we share your concern. We recognize the budgetary
    constraints and view funding related to implementation of the Wye
    agreement as an extraordinary expense. Rather than requesting the
    funding in a onetime lump sum, it was structured as a supplemental
    request and advance appropriation over fiscal year 1999, 2000, and
    2001. That structure allows us to meet our commitment to the peace
    process parties, while at the same time easing the burden on the
    budget. While only an initial $100 million was included in the
    Emergency Supplemental, we hope additional funding to support the Wye
    River agreement will be made available.
                                 aid to israel
        Question. The levels of economic and military aid for Israel in the
    budget request reflect an acceleration of the Neleman plan, which would
    have phased out economic assistance over ten years while increasing
    security assistance by half the amount. I don't believe we should
    unilaterally deviate from the agreed plan. Did you reach agreement with
    the Netanyahu Government on the requested aid levels, or do you plan to
    conclude these discussions with the Barak Government once it is formed?
        Answer. We continue to discuss with the Israeli Government the
    future reductions in U.S. economic assistance to Israel.
        In late January 1998, Israeli Finance Minister Yaacov Ne'eman began
    discussions with Members of Congress and Administration officials on a
    proposal that would gradually reduce Israel's annual $1.2 billion
    economic assistance to zero, while phasing in a $600 million increase
    in military assistance over the same period. We welcomed the Israeli
    government's initiative and have been working closely with Israel and
    the Congress to further develop the concept.
        We agree that it was time to adjust the level of assistance,
    however, discussions continue on the exact funding levels for each
    year. The key elements, a gradual ten-year reduction in ESF combined
    with a steady increase in FMF, remain the same. We have asked Israel to
    consider a reduction proposal that would include slightly increased
    reductions in the next two years, followed by a more gentle glide path
    during the following years. The Administration has critical funding
    requirements for the next two years within limited budgetary resources.
    Discussions between the Administration and the Government of Israel on
    this proposal will continue with the Barak Government once it is
    formed.
        As Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu told a joint session of
    Congress, there is no greater tribute to America's longstanding
    economic aid than Israel's achievement of economic independence.
                           milosevic is not a partner
        Question. Secretary Albright, can you assure us that the United
    States will not negotiate with Milosevic and allow him to portray
    himself as a peacemaker?
        Answer. Throughout this crisis I said that we would insist on our
    core conditions. After more than 70 days of bombing, Milosevic accepted
    them. We did not negotiate NATO's conditions with Milosevic: those
    around him knew what needed to be done to meet NATO's conditions.
        Milosevic is not our partner. We will continue to work for
    democracy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY). We will not
    provide reconstruction assistance to Serbia while he remains in power.
    We have offered a reward for his transfer to the International Criminal
    Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY), which has indicted him. And Milosevic
    will not have authority over the tasks of the international civil
    administration, which will establish and oversee the development of
    provisional democratic self-governing institutions.
                      no partition: nato unity of command
        Question. Can you assure us that the United States will not accept
    a peacekeeping plan which would partition Kosova by failing to provide
    NATO security in some areas?
        Answer. Throughout this crisis we said that we would not accept
    partition and we are not. The NATOled international military presence
    covers all of Kosova. The international civil presence (ICP) mandated
    by U.N. Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1244 provides transitional
    administration and exists to develop a political process towards
    establishment of an interim political framework providing for
    substantial self-government for all Kosovars.
        KFOR, the international security presence with NATO at its core
    enables the work of the ICP to proceed in safety. The United States
    welcomes the participation of Russian forces in KFOR, under conditions
    which confirm KFOR's unity of command, unity of mission and purpose,
    and NATO's core sectors.
                           family planning assistance
        Question. How important is family planning assistance to the
    success of our aid programs achieving their goals?
        Answer. Economic and social progress in other countries can be
    undermined by rapid population growth, which reduces the quality and
    availability of public health services, education, and contributes to
    environmental degradation. Family planning is a vital part of our
    comprehensive strategy for sustainable development, which integrates
    goals for population and health with those of protecting the
    environment, building democracy, and encouraging broad based economic
    growth. This strategy reflects the historic global consensus reached at
    the International Conference on Population and Development (ICPD) in
    1994 that confirmed the links between family planning, population and
    development.
        Family planning assistance addresses the needs of over 120 million
    couples around the world who want, but do not have access to, quality
    voluntary family planning and reproductive health services. Helping
    couples and individuals to determine freely and responsibly the number
    and spacing of their children and to address related reproductive
    health needs are core objectives of our international population
    policy. Family planning and reproductive health activities also serve
    to reduce child and maternal deaths, reduce abortion and prevent the
    spread of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS.
                           preventing future kosovas
        Question. How will a negotiated solution ensure Milosevic doesn't
    turn his wrath on Montenegro or Vojvodina or the Sandjak?
        Answer. The United States and its allies have warned Belgrade
    against threatening the democratically elected Montenegrin government.
    We have made clear that we are also watching the situation in the
    Sandjak and Vojvodina. There is no indication that either the Serb
    security forces or the Serb people are interested in supporting another
    Milosevic aggression.
        The Kosova settlement clears the way for a redoubled international
    effort to move all of Southeast Europe into the EuroAtlantic
    mainstream. The Stability Pact and related initiatives are aimed at
    helping the countries of the region consolidate and expand their
    political and economic reforms. As democratic freedom and economic
    prosperity take root nearby, Belgrade will be under . increasing
    pressure from within and without to get in step with the times and not
    to pursue more ruinous military adventures.
                aid to bosnian entities harboring war criminals
        Question. Senator Specter and I, joined by a number of our
    colleagues, wrote to President Clinton on the issue of war criminals in
    the former Yugoslavia. In the letter, we pointed out that ``it is
    imperative that the arrest warrant for Radovan Karadzic be executed'',
    not least because this would send a clear and unmistakable message to
    Slobodan Milosevic and other senior Serbian officials that they will be
    held accountable for their role in war crimes being committed in
    Kosova.'' The fiscal year 1998 and fiscal year 1999 Foreign Operations
    Appropriations Bills included a provision, which I authored,
    restricting aid to entities in Bosnia which continue to harbor war
    criminals. Each year you summarily waived this provision. Why is the
    State Department so reluctant to use the leverage this law provides to
    demand that authorities in the Republika Srpska turn over Karadzic and
    other indicted war criminals?
        Answer. The State Department strongly supports the apprehension of
    persons indicted by the ICTY, and is using assistance leverage to
    achieve this and other important Dayton goals. Department waivers for
    bilateral assistance in Bosnia are carefully targeted. We will only
    consider aid to municipalities where there is no indictee presence and
    where local authorities have shown willingness to promote Dayton goals,
    including the return of the victims of ethnic cleansing Bosniac and
    Croat refugees in the case of the Republika Srpska. Thus, places like
    Prijedor and Foca have been and will remain off limits to U.S.
    assistance until local authorities fundamentally change their position,
    including on the presence of indictees. Regarding multilateral aid,
    credits by institutions like the World Bank and the EBRD are generally
    intended to promote the tighter economic and fiscal integration of
    Bosnia-Herzegovina, as an essential precondition to postwar recovery.
    These institutions, where the U.S. has an 18 percent and a 10 percent
    voting share respectively, are unlikely to accept an abrupt change in
    course. U.S. participation in decisions approving WB and EBRD credits
    has helped ensure that they institute vetting procedures to preclude
    direct benefit to indicted persons. We have also intervened to prevent
    a World Bank loan to Foca in the RS, where several war criminals are
    openly harbored by local authorities. Assistance to the Republika
    Srpska government began in early 1999, when a new administration under
    Prime Minister Dodik took over and made a clean break from the
    extremist parties linked to the wartime leadership and to Belgrade. We
    have helped the Dodik government beat back repeated efforts by
    Belgradebacked extremists to unseat it. The Dodik government, supported
    by Bosniac and Croat parties in the RS assembly, helped keep the RS at
    peace during the Kosova conflict and has clearly aligned itself with
    the proreform forces in the FRY represented by Montenegrin Prime
    Minister Djukanovic. In both the Republika Srpska and the Federation,
    there are powerful forces in public life opposed to the Dayton agenda.
    Privatization and economic reform, interethnic cooperation, return of
    minorities, and transparent governance threaten the privileges of many
    who profited in the war. As a consequence, progress on these issues, as
    well as on ICTY indictee apprehension, has been difficult. But
    assistance leverage is producing results in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The RS
    authorities have created a climate of cooperation with the
    international community that has enabled SFOR troops to detain
    indictees with minimal risk recently carrying out the arrest of two
    persons in Prijedor and Banja Luka, one of them under sealed
    indictment. The U.S. intends to push the Bosnian authorities, both in
    the RS and the Federation, for increased efforts to meet their Dayton
    obligations. Assistance and the denial of assistance will play its part
    in this strategy.
                         kosovars in the peace process
        Question. What efforts are you making to unify and work with the
    Kosovar Albanian leadership to ensure that the Kosovars are represented
    in the peace process which will determine their future?
        Answer. Throughout the diplomatic process of recent months, we have
    maintained close contact with a broad spectrum of Kosovar leaders in
    the region and the diaspora, to describe our diplomatic efforts and
    understand their position. We worked actively to bring together Kosovar
    factions, to emphasize the importance of cooperation and a focus on the
    practical concerns of their people.
        We have pointed out to the Kosovar leadership that nothing the
    Kosovars would have gained under Rambouillet has been sacrificed under
    the current agreements. In fact, Rambouillet would have allowed
    thousands of Serb forces to remain. By contrast, under the Military-
    Technical Agreement (MTA), all Yugoslav military and police forces have
    withdrawn. This creates the physical, political, and psychological
    space necessary for building political institutions, creating the
    culture of democracy and establishing the rule of law.
        Under the terms of United Nations Security Resolution 1244 the
    Kosovars will gain genuine self-government, something they have never
    had in this century. They will be out from Milosevic's boot and will
    have the freedom to choose their own leaders and help shape the laws by
    which they are governed. That is why the Kosovar Albanian leadership
    signed on to the Rambouillet Accords, despite the absence of
    independence, and that is why they have embraced the peace agreement
    embodied in U.N. Security Council Resolution 1244 and the deployment of
    KFOR and the U.N. Mission in Kosova (UNMIK).
        We have repeatedly made clear, and will continue to emphasize in
    our discussions with Kosovar representatives, our desire for the
    various leaders in Kosova prominent individuals and political
    organizations to maintain the unity demonstrated at Rambouillet earlier
    this year. It 1 important the Kosovar leadership focuses on the
    practical needs of the Kosovar people right now.
        Since the return to Kosova, our dialogue with the leadership has
    emphasized cooperation with the UN and NATO authorities in Kosova and
    political tolerance, while condemning acts of violence and urging
    restraint.
        All our Kosovar contacts say they are ready to cooperate with us
    and the international community in these efforts. The voluntary
    undertaking of the Kosovar Liberation Army and other armed Kosovar
    forces to demilitarize and hand over their weapons to NATO is a prime
    example of the desire of the Kosovar leadership and their people to
    work with the international community in Kosova. We will continue to
    urge this type of cooperation.

                             conclusion of hearings

        Senator McConnell. That concludes our hearings. The
    subcommittee will stand in recess subject to the call of the
    Chair.
        [Whereupon, at 12:29 p.m., Thursday, May 20, the hearings
    were concuded, and the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene
    subject to the call of the Chair.]

          FOREIGN OPERATIONS, EXPORT FINANCING, AND RELATED PROGRAMS
                      APPROPRIATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2000

                                  ----------

                                           U.S. Senate,
               Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations,
                                                        Washington, DC.

                           NONDEPARTMENTAL WITNESSES

        [Clerk's note.--The subcommittee was unable to hold
    hearings on nondepartmental witnesses. The statements and
    letters of those submitting written testimony are as follows:]
      Prepared Statement of Faith Action for People-Centered Development
                                     Policy
                                  introduction
    Religious faith inspires generous giving to neighbors in need
        As Congress proceeds to develop its foreign assistance budget for
    the coming year we wish to share the concerns of many members of the
    religious community regarding these critical programs. The devastation
    and suffering borne by Central Americans in the wake of Hurricane Mitch
    is a recent example of how extreme poverty, environmental degradation
    and underdevelopment can combine to magnify disasters to unimaginable
    proportions. Whose heart has not been touched by the losses our
    neighbors have suffered?
        The testimony that Faith Action for People-Centered Development
    Policy offers today has its roots in our shared religious convictions.
    The Prophet Isaiah reminds us of God's intent: ``I am making a new
    earth and new heavens. . . . No more shall the sound of weeping be
    heard in it, or the cry of distress. Babies will no longer die in
    infancy, and all people will live out their life span. . . .'' The God
    we strive to follow is one who hears the cry of suffering people and
    inspires us to work to make a better world. As churches and faith-based
    organizations, we believe that such a theology leads directly to public
    policies and laws based on justice and compassion.
        For this fiscal year 2000 appropriations process, we reflect
    especially on the Jubilee language in our Scriptures. In ancient Israel
    debts were to be forgiven every seven years (Deut. 15). After seven
    cycles of seven years--in the 50th year--the Israelites were to declare
    a Jubilee year (Lev. 25). In the 50th year not only were debts to be
    canceled, but every family was to receive back its own land which had
    been sold or lost--for whatever reason. The Jubilee was to serve as a
    release for the poor, a restoration of land and livelihood, and a
    renewal of community and common good.
        Jesus refers to the Jubilee when he proclaims ``the year of the
    Lord's favor'': good news for the poor, release to the captives and
    freedom for the oppressed (Luke 4:16-21). For Jesus the Jubilee points
    toward a complete liberation from every kind of captivity--spiritual,
    social, economic and political.
        The churches and religious organizations that comprise the Faith
    Action believe this Jubilee principle should be applied today to
    heavily indebted poor countries. As Jubilee 2000/USA has said, ``When
    foreign debt, however incurred, so drains the economic resources of a
    people that all hope of a better future is foreclosed, it is time to
    admit the inhumanity of maintaining the fiction of repayment.'' It is
    time to let people living in poor countries have a new beginning!
    The United States lags behind others in humanitarian commitment
        Congressional support for relief and development assistance remains
    low, and the United States has now fallen behind Japan, Germany and
    France in terms of actual dollar amounts of assistance given to less
    developed nations. As a percentage of GNP, we now spend less on helping
    the poor overseas than any other of the world's 21 wealthiest nations.
    Last year, one-fourth of all U.S. foreign aid went to high-income
    nations, at a per capita expenditure of over $5 per person for the 638
    million people living there. In contrast, the 3 billion living in the
    world's poorest countries received the equivalent of only 96 cents per
    person. Of this assistance, almost half went to military or security
    assistance. In overall terms, less than one percent of the Federal
    budget is spent on foreign aid, and less than half of that goes to
    development and humanitarian programs that help millions of the world's
    poorest people. This situation is deeply regrettable for a prosperous
    and powerful nation with the means and opportunity to make a tremendous
    difference in the lives of impoverished peoples and countries.
    Humanitarian foreign aid saves lives overseas and benefits Americans
        Assistance programs which help the poorest in the world really do
    make a difference. Humanitarian foreign aid improves standards of
    living, promotes stable economies, protects the environment, and can
    prevent the need for continual disaster response. Humanitarian aid can
    prevent starvation. Yet in Sudan, for example,--where the World Food
    Programme now estimates that ``over two million Sudanese people
    affected by war and climatic calamities, will not be able to produce or
    obtain sufficient food to meet their basic needs during 1999'' \1\--
    food distribution centers are unable to provide starving people with
    the full rations they need to survive due to shortfalls in
    international giving. Reductions in U.S. foreign aid will only make
    worse this and other similar crises.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ World Food Programme web site, January 12, 1999, http://
    www.wfp.org/OP/Countries/sudan/emop5826 02.html
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Famines often result following drought and civil conflict, but
    foreign aid programs can prevent or alleviate such disasters. The
    Center for Disease Control notes that since the early 1960s, most
    emergencies involving refugees and displaced persons have taken place
    in less developed countries where local resources have been
    insufficient for providing prompt and adequate assistance.\2\ Beyond
    direct food relief and refugee assistance, foreign aid-funded
    microcredit programs allow families to save enough money to survive
    seasonal crop setbacks, and avoid starvation.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ Centers for Disease Control. Famine-Affected, refugee, and
    displaced populations: recommendations for public health issues. MMWR
    1992; 41 (No. RR-13).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Finally, foreign assistance is good for America. It keeps U.S.
    citizens healthier and reduces our health costs. This is because
    contributions to international health agencies provide the funds to
    detect, prevent and contain the worldwide spread of highly contagious
    diseases, including HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, cholera and the Ebola
    virus. When ``the other side of the world'' is now just an airplane
    trip away, the United States cannot afford to turn a blind eye to
    health emergencies in other countries. For example, the global
    eradication of smallpox saves the United States more than $200 million
    a year, since American children no longer need to be vaccinated against
    the disease.\3\ Other international immunization programs have the
    potential for comparable future savings.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ USAID
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Foreign assistance also has a direct effect on the U.S. economy.
    From 1990-1996 U.S. exports to developing countries grew by $115
    billion, supporting an additional 1.5 million American jobs. Almost all
    of the developing countries which are among the top 50 purchasers of
    U.S. exports are those in which we have made major investments in
    education and training.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ USAID, Academy for Educational Development.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Development requires a holistic and integrated approach
        While resources for development assistance are declining, U.S.
    policies and programs to support market development and the private
    sector in developing countries are currently expanding. Congress must
    ensure that these latter efforts are consistent with the overriding
    goal of people-centered development. The importance of the integrated
    involvement of the state, market institutions and civil society in
    bringing about equitable sustainable development is now widely
    recognized. Each has an essential role to play in the development
    process and one cannot substitute for the other.
        For example, while there is increasing support in Congress and the
    Administration for trade and investment, neither sub-Saharan Africa nor
    Central America will be able to attract sufficient private investment
    without debt cancellation and dramatic improvements in the regions'
    physical and social infrastructure. High levels of indebtedness are
    seen as a disadvantage to potential investors, and great attention is
    needed particularly in the areas of health and education. The African
    continent is being plagued by epidemics, including the HIV/AIDS virus,
    and no stable economic environment can be created without addressing
    this crisis in the process.
        In a world with 841 million hungry people,\5\ the need for official
    development assistance has not diminished with the expansion of private
    capital flows to a handful of developing countries. Especially as last
    year's financial turmoil demonstrated, resulting almost overnight in
    millions of people either falling back into poverty or even more
    desperate circumstances. Now is the time for the United States to
    respond to this message by committing itself to greatly expanding its
    funding for people-centered, sustainable development in order to begin
    the steps necessary to prevent future disasters from reaching such epic
    proportions.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ Hunger in a Global Economy: Hunger 1998; Bread for the World
    Institute, Silver Spring, MD, USA; p. 3.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Faith action recommendations
        As we consider the needs of those we serve in years to come we
    would like to highlight several areas that we believe deserve priority
    attention by the Committee this year:
                   cancel the crushing debt of poor countries
        The development prospects for many of the world's poorest countries
    are being mortgaged to their crushing debt burden. As the millennium
    approaches, a broad grouping of religious, environmental, and
    development organizations around the world have launched a global
    campaign, Jubilee 2000, to cancel the crushing debt of the poorest
    countries by the year 2000.
        Many organizations participating in Faith Action for People-
    Centered Development have joined Jubilee 2000/USA. This campaign calls
    for debt cancellation for the poorest countries in ways that do not
    perpetuate poverty or environmental degradation and that involves civil
    society in these countries in determining the terms of debt relief and
    programs of development.
        The Administration's request for $120 million for debt
    restructuring reflects an increase in funding for debt relief and
    represents another step in the right direction.
    Bilateral debt
        We support the Administration's proposal of $50 million to fund
    debt relief or buy-backs of certain outstanding concessional debt
    stocks in support of conservation of endangered tropical forests.
    Nurturing and protecting the environment is central to our faith and
    vision of God's purpose in creation.
        We support the Administration's request of $3 million to fund debt
    reduction for qualifying countries through the Paris Club. According to
    their calculations, this, combined with funds previously appropriated
    will allow the US in fiscal year 2000 to provide approximately $50
    million in face value debt reduction for the poorest countries such as
    Cameroon, Guinea, Madagascar, Niger and Zambia. We also support the
    request for an additional $17 million for concessional debt reduction
    for Africa, in order to provide a 100 percent debt reduction program
    for approximately $115 million in face value of concessional debt for
    qualifying African countries.
        Nevertheless, while these requests move in the right direction, we
    call on Congress to act to cancel both the concessional and non-
    concessional bilateral debt owed the U.S. by all of the highly-indebted
    poor countries that respect human rights, and are not engaged in
    excessive military expenditures. Such action would particularly benefit
    the countries of sub-Saharan Africa which constitute the large majority
    of highly indebted poor countries.
        We also want to raise a concern about the eligibility requirements
    for debt relief. Bilateral debt cancellation should be carried out in
    ways that strengthen the country's commitment to transparent and
    democratic processes and to poverty reduction rather than being
    determined by rigid formulas for macro-economic policy reform that the
    Administration has adopted. The August 1997 report ``Jobs for Africa''
    by the United Nations Development Program and the International Labor
    Organization finds that these policy ``reforms,'' often referred to as
    ``structural adjustment programs,'' have been ``purchased at the price
    of economic contraction, high unemployment and massive poverty . . . in
    large parts of sub-Saharan Africa''.\6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ ``Jobs for Africa, UN Development Program and the International
    Labor Organization,'' August 1997, p. 29.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Multilateral debt
        We support the Administration's proposal to contribute $50 million
    to the World Bank's Heavily Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) Trust Fund,
    although we believe the U.S. contribution should be greater. The United
    States has not yet made any contribution to this fund. Although the
    HIPC initiative represents an important recognition of the gravity of
    the debt problem for impoverished countries, implementation of this
    initiative that was agreed to by creditor nations and institutions in
    1996, has been far too slow. Too few countries have met the rigid
    eligibility requirements, and the amount of debt relief that has been
    provided is inadequate. We strongly urge that HIPC participation no
    longer be conditioned on acceptance of IMF and World Bank-designed
    structural adjustment programs. These policies have been a disaster for
    people living in poverty and have undermined authentic people-centered
    development.
        We are gratified that following their most recent meeting in
    February, Finance ministers from the Group of Seven nations have
    announced a major new drive to speed up debt relief for the world's
    poorest countries and promised to strike a deal by June. In our view,
    it is critically important that the U.S. take greater leadership in
    ensuring that reforms of the HIPC initiative are accelerated and
    expanded.
        In view of this development and our conviction that the unpayable
    multilateral debts of the world's poorest countries should be canceled,
    we call on Congress to move beyond the President's request and
    contribute to the HIPC Trust Fund an amount sufficient to accomplish
    this goal of giving poor nations a fresh start in the new millennium.
        We urge the Committee to:
        1. Appropriate sufficient funds to cancel the bilateral
    concessional and non-concessional debt owed to the U.S. by all the
    highly indebted IDA-only countries by the end of the year 2000. Toward
    that end, Congress should investigate the possibility of amending the
    fiscal year 1991 credit reform provisions to the Congressional Budget
    and Impoundment Control Act of 1974 to make it possible to cancel the
    bilateral debt of high-indebted poor countries without a specific
    appropriation;
        2. Provide funding for the HIPC Trust Fund at a level commensurate
    with our nation's compassion, wealth and influence in the world, with a
    view to canceling the crushing multilateral debts of HIPC countries.
    Direct the Administration to use its voice and vote in the multilateral
    lending institutions to reform the HIPC process so as to provide deeper
    and more rapid debt relief for many more heavily-indebted poor
    countries without current forms of structural adjustment
    conditionality; and
        3. Approve the Administration's request of $127 million for the
    African Development Fund, earmarking a significant portion for debt
    forgiveness by the African Development Bank.
            give priority to sub-saharan africa and central america
        Faith Action believes that support for people-centered development
    in sub-Saharan Africa and reconstruction in Central America should be
    top priorities for U.S. assistance. These priorities should be
    reflected in the amount and type of bilateral assistance and in support
    for multilateral institutions that play an important role in these
    regions. In as much as Central American reconstruction efforts are
    being dealt with in separate legislation, we will focus our comments
    here on programs primarily related to Africa.
        Last year Congress recommitted the U.S. government to strengthen
    African agriculture and food security and to follow people-centered
    principles in the process by passing the Africa: Seeds of Hope Act
    (PL105-385). This new law will focus U.S. policy more sharply on
    support for sustainable agriculture and rural development. It will
    promote policies that address the needs of African women, small
    farmers, small entrepreneurs, rural workers and communities; bolster
    participation in decision-making by affected people, and strengthen
    Africans' abilities to plan, implement and ``own'' programs. We applaud
    Congress for this renewed commitment to African development, and we are
    encouraged that the Administration is now prepared to expand USAID's
    Africa Food Security Initiative by 50 percent.
        The last three years have marked a period of enormous change in
    U.S. relations with sub-Saharan Africa. The President's trip to the
    region along with Congressional consideration of Africa trade
    legislation, along with concerted efforts to strengthen the U.S.
    constituency for Africa have all shaped this process. Differences over
    priorities and approaches have surfaced in the course of debate on
    these changes. The concerns that we traditionally have raised about
    equity, democracy, and sustainability in U.S. policy toward developing
    countries apply in an even greater measure with regard to sub-Saharan
    Africa. This is due especially to the proportion of the population
    living in poverty and the enormous environmental challenges facing the
    continent. We believe that all policies toward sub-Saharan Africa
    should be evaluated in light of their likely impact on people-centered
    development.
    Development assistance
        Debate on U.S. development assistance to sub-Saharan Africa in
    recent years has centered on the question of separate funding for the
    Development Fund for Africa (DFA). The DFA was established in part to
    increase the priority of sub-Saharan Africa within U.S. development
    policies and programs and to guarantee funds for its needs. We support
    the Administration's proposal to restore separate funding of the DFA
    this year. DFA has served as a visible point of reference and a
    mechanism for continuing dialogue about U.S. assistance to Africa.
        We believe, however, that the relative priority accorded sub-
    Saharan Africa must be evaluated in relation to all bilateral economic
    assistance and not just development aid. This is the case because
    development aid has decreased at the same time that economic assistance
    to other regions has increased dramatically. Africa's share as a
    percentage of overall bilateral economic assistance also has decreased
    from 17.4 percent in fiscal year 1994 to 13.4 percent in fiscal year
    1998. We note that aid to Africa accounted for as little as 10.6
    percent of bilateral economic assistance in fiscal year 1996. The
    relative decrease in aid to sub-Saharan Africa relates to our concern
    about the skewed allocation of U.S. foreign assistance resources among
    geographic regions.
        In particular, we continue to call for a transfer of resources from
    the Middle East to regions where human development needs are much
    greater. We commend the Committee for establishing a ceiling earmark in
    fiscal year 1998 for funding for the Middle East Region. Additionally,
    we are encouraged by the decision of Israel and Egypt to accept annual
    reductions of economic assistance over the next nine years, and by the
    Administration's proposal this year to accelerate this process.
    However, we would like to see the full amount of these reductions
    rededicated to development programs, and oppose the proposal that half
    of Israel's reduction in economic assistance be redirected into
    military assistance for that state. We urge the Committee to take the
    next step this year by shifting funds from high-income countries,
    particularly in the Middle East, to poor countries in that region and
    in other parts of the world.
        Additionally, we are concerned about the Administration's
    supplemental request that accompanies the budget, to fund
    implementation of agreements made last fall at Wye River. We are
    mindful of the disproportionate percentage of foreign aid already going
    to the Middle East. The request for an additional $1.9 billion for
    Israel, Jordan and the Palestinians as part of the Wye arrangements
    raises many questions for our community. We support development
    assistance for the Palestinians and Jordan, but are deeply concerned
    about the $1.2 billion for Israel. We encourage the Congress to
    determine how the $1.2 billion figure for Israel was set, and to verify
    its need. We request assurances that no U.S. funds will be used to
    build Israeli bypass roads in the West Bank or for other purposes
    viewed by the U.S. as inimical to the peace process. The additional
    assistance to Israel should not be provided if does not implement the
    Wye River agreement. We support generous assistance for Jordan, and ask
    that those funds be directed to development and infrastructure purposes
    rather than for the provision of additional weaponry. We urge Congress
    to support the Administration's request for continuing aid to the
    Palestinian people, as well as the additional Wye River commitments to
    them. Finally, we ask that these peace process related needs not be met
    at the expense of other regions.
        We believe that the policy framework that guides the DFA remains
    entirely appropriate and relevant. It includes the elements that are
    essential to fostering people-centered development: an emphasis on
    participation, on the role and integration of women, on concerns for
    equity and environment, and support for agricultural production. We
    note that this Administration has undertaken a number of initiatives
    and reforms at an organization-wide level and at the regional level
    that build on these policy concerns. This includes adoption of a Gender
    Action Plan, a Participation Initiative, a Greater Horn of Africa
    Initiative, and a new African Food Security Initiative.
    International development association
        We want to commend the Committee for the role that it played in
    fiscal year 1998 in securing approval of the full U.S. contribution to
    the World Bank's International Development Association (IDA), including
    funding for arrears. This year the Administration has requested $803
    million to fulfill part of its pledge for the twelfth replenishment of
    this important fund. While we continue to work with other organizations
    to monitor and press for reforms at the World Bank, we believe that IDA
    financing remains of critical importance to sub-Saharan Africa. At the
    same time, we have grave concerns about the about the impact of
    structural adjustment programs and urge that these kinds of anti-
    development ``reforms'' be abandoned.
        We recognize the importance of IDA as a funding mechanism for
    creating new opportunities for persons and nations. Congress should
    maintain and strengthen the provision which it included in the fiscal
    year 1998 foreign operations appropriation that directed the
    Administration to use the U.S. voice and vote to encourage the World
    Bank and IDA to ``systematically consult with local communities on the
    potential impact of loans as part of the normal lending process, and
    expand the participation of affected peoples and non-government
    organizations in decisions on the selection, design, and implementation
    of policies and projects.''
    Food security
        Promoting food security in Africa is of paramount importance. Rural
    Africa is the key to equitable economic growth in the predominantly
    agrarian societies that make up the vast majority of the countries. A
    recent USDA study projects serious food gaps in sub-Saharan Africa.
    ``The number of people who cannot meet their nutritional requirement is
    projected to increase from 303 million in the base year [1997] to 526
    million by 2007. This means that Sub-Saharan Africa--projected to
    account for 25 percent of the population of the study countries--will
    have about 44 percent of the undernourished people.'' \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ USDA Economic Research Service. Food Security Assessment.
    Washington, USDA, November 1997. Pg. 6.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We urge the Committee to renew support for the International Fund
    for Agricultural Development (IFAD). IFAD was created 20 years ago with
    the specific mandate of alleviating hunger and poverty through
    assistance to small farmers and the rural poor. It is one of the more
    effective multilateral institutions in promoting people-centered
    development. In recent years it has played a leading role in the global
    initiatives to expand micro-enterprise and to combat desertification.
    But the Clinton Administration has drastically reduced current funding
    for IFAD to a mere $2.5 million this year, and has signaled its intent
    to withdraw from IFAD in the future. That decision should be reversed.
        We also urge Congress to work with the Administration to fully
    implement PL105-385, the Africa: Seeds of Hope Act, by supporting the
    Administration's request for a 50 percent increase in funding for the
    African Food Security Initiative.
    African development foundation
        U.S. support for other institutions that are working to promote
    people-centered development in Africa continues to be an important
    component of U.S. development policy. The African Development
    Foundation (ADF) continues to work to support local grassroots
    development, and development of African leaders and institutions that
    can more effectively address the complex challenges and opportunities
    that face the people of the continent. Funding for the ADF was
    drastically reduced in fiscal year 1999. This should be reversed and
    the appropriation for ADF in fiscal year 2000 should be restored to at
    least the 1998 level.
    Trade and investment
        We note that the President's request includes $30 million for an
    Africa Trade and Investment Initiative. According to USAID, the
    assistance will be used to help African countries improve the
    investment environment, promote relationships between U.S. and African
    businesses, and provide non-project assistance ``to help alleviate the
    budget crunch in nations embracing aggressive, market-friendly
    reforms.'' \8\ Market liberalization, however, should not be seen as an
    end in itself, but should be pursued selectively as part of a package
    of reforms designed to achieve sustainable development--especially the
    reduction of poverty and hunger--in environmentally responsible ways.
    The United States should seek ways to increase trade with and
    investment in African nations that can expand economic opportunities
    for the greatest number of ordinary Africans.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ Testimony by USAID Administrator Brian Atwood before the House
    International Relations Committee, March 5, 1998.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The United States should not press African countries to adopt a
    rigid and inappropriate ``one-size-fits-all'' prescription for economic
    reform. Instead, eligibility requirements for assistance under this
    program should underscore the U.S. government's desire to form mutually
    beneficial economic partnerships with those nations that are making
    steady progress toward the reduction of poverty and the establishment
    of open and accountable policymaking institutions that enable all
    citizens to take part in determining political and economic priorities.
        We urge the Committee to:
        1. Approve the Administration's request for $745 million in
    development assistance for Africa and to re-establish the DFA.
        2. Approve funding for the International Development Association at
    the President's request level and encourage the Administration to work
    to expand participation requirements and procedures at the Bank to
    include policy-based loans, the formulation of Country Assistance
    Strategies, and Consultative Group meetings.
        3. Increase funding for the International Fund for Agricultural
    Development (IFAD), to be funded entirely out of international
    operations and program account. We also strongly urge Congress to
    insist that the Administration reverse its decision not to participate
    in future replenishment negotiations for IFAD.
        4. Increase funding for the African Development Foundation by $6
    million to $17 million, the fiscal year 1995 level.
        5. Direct the reductions in Israel and Egypt's assistance to
    address development needs and not to support military purposes.
    renew congressional leadership in favor of u.s. participation in a ban
                                 on land mines
        The enormous human suffering by innocent people, particularly
    children, caused by tens of millions of landmines has deeply moved
    people around the world who joined together to pressure governments to
    agree to ban the production, stockpiling, transfer and use of
    landmines. Many of our organizations were among those calling on the
    President to join with 133 other countries in signing the treaty to put
    in place such a ban. Our organizations run programs in countries most
    affected by the plague of these weapons, and see first hand the
    tremendous costs they continue to inflict. We were deeply troubled by
    President Clinton's decision not to sign this treaty and we continue to
    urge him to reverse that decision. We are also disturbed by their
    request for $50 million for a new landmine weapons system that will not
    comply with the Ottowa treaty.\9\ Congress' leadership on the issue of
    landmines has been critically important. We commend Congress for its
    1996 approval of a moratorium on U.S. use of anti-personnel landmines.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ ``Pentagon Seeks Funds for New Type of Land Mine,'' LA Times,
    February 22, 1999, p. A1.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We urge the Committee to:
        1. Approve the Administration's request of $40 million for de-
    mining operations;
        2. Support renewed congressional efforts to call on the President
    to sign the Ottawa treaty and quickly bring the U.S. into full
    compliance.
       reject funding for ineffective and abusive anti-narcotics programs
        Funding for international narcotics control and law enforcement
    activities is one of the fastest growing foreign operations accounts.
    The fiscal year 1999 combined levels of $261 million in the Omnibus
    appropriations bill and an additional $232.6 million in ``emergency''
    supplemental appropriations resulted in an allocation of $493.6 million
    to these programs--substantially more than double the fiscal year 1998
    level. Widespread concern about illicit drug production, trafficking
    and abuse does not justify increases in programs whose effectiveness
    has been questioned by, among others, the General Accounting Office.
    The program focuses increasingly on Colombia. Resources for that
    country from various U.S. anti-narcotic programs nearly tripled between
    fiscal year 1995 ($51.4 million) to fiscal year 1997 ($136.4 million).
    During the same period coca production in Colombia increased by 56
    percent.\10\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ Statement on certification by Gen. Barry McCaffrey, Dir. Of
    the Office of National Drug Control Policy, Feb. 26, 1998.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        While largely ineffective in reducing overall drug production, the
    programs have served to strengthen foreign security forces implicated
    in human rights abuses. We strongly support the law that prohibits
    assistance to units of foreign security forces that are believed to be
    responsible for human rights violations.
        Many experts have argued that anti-narcotics efforts focused
    primarily on treatment of drug abuse are more effective and less costly
    than those aimed at source country eradication or interdiction. ``A
    1994 RAND study found that $34 million invested in treatment reduced
    cocaine use as much as $783 million spent for foreign source country
    programs or $366 million for interdiction.'' \11\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \11\ ``Rethinking International Drug Control Policy: New Directions
    for U.S. Policy,'' a report of an independent task force sponsored by
    the Council on Foreign Relations, Feb. 1997.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        We urge the Committee to:
        1. Reject funding for foreign military involved in anti-narcotics
    activities and approve funding only for activities that:
              a. help to strengthen the capacity of civilian police and
            judicial systems to carry out effective law enforcement and
            respect human rights;
              b. promote development programs that help to provide a viable
            alternative livelihood for coca producers, especially those in
            Colombia, Peru, and Bolivia.
        2. Enforce the ``Leahy law'' that currently prohibits assistance to
    abusive units of foreign security forces and extend it to apply to
    anti-narcotics and other security assistance programs funded and
    operated from the Department of Defense.
        3. Monitor human rights abuses in Colombia and make U.S. efforts to
    curb such abuses a cornerstone of U.S.-Colombian relations;
        4. Work with the Administration to increase the effectiveness of
    multilateral approaches to illicit drug-trafficking.
        We thank the Committee for this opportunity to express our views.
    We look forward to ongoing discussions with members of Congress and the
    President on how best to express in law and public policy our common
    commitment to the values of justice, compassion and human solidarity.
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Timothy L. Dickinson, Immediate-Past Chair,
                   Section of International Law and Practice
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, the American Bar
    Association (ABA) appreciates the opportunity to present testimony on
    the fiscal year 2000 Foreign Operations Appropriations bill.
        My name is Timothy Dickinson and I am the Immediate-Past Chair of
    the American Bar Association's Section of International Law and
    Practice. This written testimony is being submitted for the record on
    behalf of the ABA at the request of Philip Anderson, President of the
    Association.
        This testimony outlines the numerous projects undertaken by the ABA
    which embrace the rule of law and democracy throughout the world. The
    ABA is the largest volunteer professional organization with over
    400,000 members. These democratization projects are leveraged by the
    pro-bono contributions from United States lawyers, judges, law
    professors, and sister legal institutions. The results have advanced
    the United States foreign policy goals in a very cost-effective manner.
    For these reasons, Mr. Chairman and Committee Members, we hope that
    these programs continue to receive Congressional support.
                                   background
        The often maligned and misunderstood issue of foreign aid offers an
    opportunity for cooperation. Open-ended foreign aid programs can
    frustrate long-term growth if they allow countries to avoid difficult
    political decisions, such as how to end corruption and special
    privileges for elites. However, carefully designed foreign aid programs
    can make a significant difference for reform-minded governments that
    are plagued by political instability and corruption. To be competitive
    in today's global economy, many developing countries recognize that
    they must embrace private, rather than state, ownership of business.
    They must open their markets to foreign exports, technology, ideas, and
    investment and accept the rule of law. The most crucial aspect of
    democratization is the development of credible and dependable legal
    institutions rooted in the rule of law.
                                  aba projects
        Mr. Chairman and Subcommittee members, I would like to briefly
    layout the ABA's specific programs which focuses on the rule of law and
    democratization and underscore the ABA's willingness to continue
    working to assist democratization efforts around the world. All ABA
    democratization projects have been guided by three principles. First,
    these projects are designed to be responsive to the needs and
    priorities of the host countries; the countries, not the ABA, define
    the need. Second, the design of these programs recognizes that U.S.
    legal experience and traditions offer only one approach that
    participating countries may wish to consider. Third, these projects are
    public service endeavors, not devices for developing business
    opportunities. The result of these programs has always been to take a
    modest grant and leverage those sums to yield a much larger benefit for
    the host governments and people.
          a. the central and east european law initiative (``ceeli'')
        The most comprehensive technical legal assistance project of the
    ABA is the Central and East European Law Initiative, or ``CEELI.''
    Shortly after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1990, CEELI was organized
    by the ABA Section of International Law and Practice to provide
    technical legal assistance to the emerging democracies in Central and
    Eastern Europe. By 1992, CEELI began to provide assistance to the Newly
    Independent States of the former Soviet Union (``NIS'').
        Through a variety of program components, CEELI is making available
    U.S. legal expertise to assist countries that are in the process of
    modifying or restructuring their laws and legal systems. CEELI has
    focused on work in several critical priority areas: constitutional
    reform; judicial restructuring; bar reform; criminal law and procedure
    reform; commercial law; legal education reform; and has helped develop
    and/or institutionalized self-sustaining indigenous non-governmental
    organizations (NGOs) in more than 22 countries.
        Designed to respond to the needs of the countries, CEELI has
    emphasized long-term engagement and nurtured projects that facilitate
    extensive consultations with policy makers, legal scholars, judges, and
    attorneys in each country. Accordingly, CEELI has developed individual
    country plans that address the particularized circumstances of each
    locale. CEELI accomplishes its work primarily through resident liaisons
    and legal specialists, working pro bono, who spend one to two years
    working on a daily and continuous basis with local partners. CEELI
    liaisons often live and work in places where the comforts of life that
    you and I often take for granted do not exist.
        Over the course of the past nine years, CEELI has established
    itself as a fundamental force for law reform in Central and Eastern
    Europe and the NIS. To date, CEELI has conducted 519 Technical Legal
    Assistance Workshops; assessed over 397 draft laws; placed 201 long-
    term liaisons and 205 legal specialists in the region; hosted 47
    Central and Eastern European law school deans; sent dozens of U.S.
    legal reform experts to assist in law school reform; and has placed a
    variety of students from the NIS in LL.M. programs throughout the
    United States. The credit for this remarkable achievement goes to the
    over 5,000 American attorneys, judges, legal scholars, and private
    practitioners, who have, as acts of public service, given their time
    and expertise to make this project successful.
        When calculating the in-kind contributions of volunteer legal
    professionals at an understated rate of $150 per hour, CEELI has
    yielded over $55 million of pro bono service. Considering the modest
    CEELI budget in comparison to funding allocated to consulting firms,
    the exceptional programmatic impact and financial leverage that an NGO
    can achieve by using qualified volunteer professionals in a public
    service project is indisputable. This model of a volunteer professional
    assistance project is a viable and cost-effective alternative to other
    uses of U.S. government funding by, for example, for-profit firms.
    Congress has voiced strong support for CEELI and its ability to
    leverage U.S. taxpayer dollars (H.R. Rep. No. 524, 103rd Cong., 2d
    Sess., 82 (1994); S. Rep. No. 287, 103rd Cong., 2d Sess., 76 (1994);
    H.R. Rep. No. 128, 104th Cong., 1st Sess., 80 (1995); H.R. Rep. No.
    143, 104th Cong., 1st Sess., 31 (1995); S. Rep. No. 143, 104th Cong.,
    1st Sess., 42 (1995); S. Rep. No. 000, 104th Cong., 1st Sess., 40
    (1995); H.R. Rep. No. 600, 104th Cong., 2d Sess., 31 (1996); S. Rep.
    No. 35, 105th Cong., 1st Sess., 25 (1997); H.R. Rep. No. 176, 105th
    Cong., 1st Sess., 32 (1997); H.R. Rep. No. 719, 105th Cong., 2d Sess.,
    39 (1998); S. Rep. No. 255, 105th Cong., 2d Sess., 27 (1998) .
                  b. the aba cambodia democracy & law project
        The Cambodia Law and Democracy Project (``Cambodia Project'') was
    launched by the ABA Section of International Law and Practice during
    1992 at the request of Cambodian institutions seeking assistance with
    Cambodia's law modernization process. The principal purpose of the
    Cambodia Project was to assist Cambodia in planning and implementing
    legal and judicial reforms to promote democracy, a market economy, and
    the rule of law.
        Under a grant from the Asia Foundation in 1993, the Cambodia
    Project provided a collection of legal materials in Phnom Penh
    principally through ABA donations. In late 1996, the Cambodia Project
    established a Legal Research and Documentation Center at the Bar
    Association of the Kingdom of Cambodia (BAKC) which has now secured
    over 1,800 donated books and publications, which include Khmer laws and
    selected translations, the Official Journal of the Kingdom of Cambodia,
    and foreign and American legal materials. Since its official opening in
    March of 1997, the Center has been fulfilling requests for information
    from lawyers, law students, NGOs, and the National Assembly Legal
    Research and Documentation Center.
        During 1993-94, the ABA Constitutional Law Advisors assisted in
    drafting the new Constitution, and legal education advisors provided a
    needs assessment of Cambodia's legal education programs and
    institutions. Short-term advisors traveled to Cambodia to assist in the
    areas of foreign investment, contract law, and commercial arbitration.
    U.S. legal experts provided commentary in the areas of border disputes,
    intellectual property, penal code issues, environmental law, family
    law, and bar association development. During this period, an ABA
    resident legal advisor was placed in Phnom Penh to oversee all ABA and
    Asia Foundation legal initiatives. This action led to a request from
    USAID that the ABA take on a larger role in the law development process
    in Cambodia, which resulted in a cooperative agreement between USAID/
    Cambodia and the ABA in 1995.
        Until July 1997 the Cambodia Project had three long-term resident
    advisors in Cambodia. They assisted the Ministry of Commerce and the
    BAKC, providing institution-building, teaching, and legal drafting
    assistance. By working in close coordination with the Ministry of
    Commerce, the Cambodia Project effectively extended efforts to improve
    Cambodia's legal system into Cambodia's market economy. The completion
    of Cambodia's Bankruptcy Law, Business Organizations and Contract Law,
    Products Liability Law, and Contracts Law is evidence of the project's
    successful advancement. In addition to their roles in law drafting, the
    advisors conducted classes at a local university, seminars in the
    provinces, and daily discussion and training sessions at the Ministry
    of Commerce. The purpose of these events were to train Cambodian
    officials and lawyers to understand and utilize the laws created to
    advance the rule of law and foster Cambodian social and economic
    prosperity.
        In late July 1997 the Cambodia Project was placed on hold by USAID
    due to the political developments that occurred in Cambodia in early
    July. The Cambodia Law and Democracy Project is no longer active and
    was terminated by the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
    effective September 30, 1998. The termination of the program is a
    consequence of significant undercutting of rule-of-law program funding
    in Cambodia by the U.S. government as the result of political upheaval
    which started in July 1997.
        Despite July 1997's political turmoil, the project was effective in
    expanding the rule of law in Cambodia. Not only because of the legal
    didactic components that the project had both in the Ministry of
    Commerce and the BAKC, but also because of its important role in
    building and strengthening a civil society in Cambodia. The creation of
    a non-partisan Bar Association independent from government which
    represents the interests and concerns of the country's legal community
    is helping to achieve a social and political equilibrium in Cambodia.
    This project has provided a unique opportunity for ABA members to build
    the foundation for increasing the rule of law in an emerging democracy.
        The outlook to resume technical assistance activities in Cambodia
    is good. The ABA continues exploring the possibility to reinitiate
    collaborative efforts and technical assistance projects in the near
    future. The recent political and progressive economic stabilization in
    Cambodia should attract an increase of aid funds from the U.S.
    government and other international donors.
        As with all legal technical assistance programs, the ABA Cambodia
    Law and Democracy Project developed all program components at the
    request of, and in close consultation with, participating country
    institutions. The bulk of the assistance was provided by U.S. lawyers
    on a pro bono basis utilizing donated materials, allowing a small grant
    to be leveraged for the benefit of democracy in the host country. The
    Cambodia Project received $1,780,679 over the last five years, and the
    ABA contributed an additional $1,033,360 to this project.
            c. african law initiatives and legal education programs
        In conjunction with the Superior Court of the District of Columbia,
    the ABA Section of International Law and Practice has completed the
    first and second phases of a three-phase U.S./Africa Legal Exchange.
    Supported by the United States Information Agency, this program focuses
    on Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia. It seeks to assist these
    countries in creating a legal environment conducive for investment and
    for the provision of more efficient legal services. It entailed a
    month-long visit to the United States of lawyers and judges from each
    of these countries. The third phase is currently being completed.
        The ABA also has a number of other projects in Africa in various
    stages of development. For example, the Section of International Law
    and Practice has taken an active role in securing and coordinating the
    donation of legal materials for Liberia. It has also completed an
    International Legal Exchange Program in West Africa. This included
    taking a delegation of U.S. lawyers to meet with officials in the Ivory
    Coast and Ghana.
        With funding from the United States Information Agency Office of
    Citizen Exchanges, the African Law Initiative Legal Education Program
    continues to assist twelve law schools in eight African countries:
    Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi, Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia.
    The program, which was initiated at a major meeting of African and
    American law school deans in Nairobi in 1994, is administered by the
    ABA Section of Legal Education and Admissions to the Bar. Over thirty
    United States law schools have participated. The program has created
    and supported links between U.S. and African law schools and helped to
    improve the capacity of the African law schools to train lawyers who
    are responsive to the new needs and opportunities brought about by
    democratic and free-market reforms in their countries. Solid links have
    emerged over the course of the program. In addition to bringing African
    and American law school professors and deans together to lay the
    groundwork for linkages, the program has assisted with faculty training
    and curriculum development, with an important focus on clinical legal
    education. With assistance provided by this program, significant
    progress is being made on the development of practice-based and
    service-oriented legal education at African law schools. The program
    has shipped or facilitated the shipment of many law books and journals,
    helping to update the collections at the law libraries.
        Under the current Law Faculty Curriculum Development Program, the
    African law schools are being assisted with the development or
    strengthening of curriculum in women and the law, commercial law and
    environmental law. Legal educators from Ghana, Ethiopia, Kenya, Uganda,
    Malawi, and Zambia undertook a study tour to U.S. law schools where
    they worked to bolster their course syllabi in the three priority
    areas. A workshop on women and the law was held in Ghana in December
    1998 and a workshop on environmental law is planned for March 1999 in
    Uganda. A commercial law workshop will be held later in the year in
    Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. In addition, the program is supporting the
    comprehensive curriculum review being undertaken by the University of
    Nairobi Faculty of Law.
        As assessment of the legal education system in South Africa was
    conducted for the South African Ministry of Justice and a project is
    currently under development.
    d. asia law initiative council--aba programs to strengthen the rule of
                                  law in china
        The ABA has initiated several activities to provide leadership in
    fulfilling the promises made by Presidents Clinton and Jiang for
    cooperation in the field of law.\1\ First, the ABA has signed an
    Agreement with the All-China Lawyer's Association to collaborate in
    lawyer training and internships, bar organization and management,
    continuing legal education, legal information exchange and law practice
    management. The first step in implementing this Agreement is being
    initiated through internships for Chinese lawyers to come to this
    country to receive training in U.S. firms. As part of the agreement
    between the All China Lawyers Association and the American Bar
    Association executed last May, the International Legal Exchange Program
    will implement the exchange portion of this agreement. Up to 10 lawyers
    from the People's Republic of China will visit the United States each
    year for individual placements in law firms or law offices. This
    internship would be for a six-month period following some form of basic
    training in the United States. The program will begin during the summer
    of 1999. There will be a rigorous selection process administered by the
    All China Lawyers Association. The top 15 candidates will be selected
    by means of this examination for further interviewing by both officers
    of the ACLA and by a small group of American lawyers resident in
    Beijing. No more than 10 lawyers will be selected as a final group of
    candidates.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ Joint Communique, October, 1997. Joint Statement, June-July,
    1998.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Second, with Ford Foundation support, the ABA recently concluded a
    large trial demonstration program hosted by the National Judges College
    of the Supreme People's Court in Beijing. The National Judges College
    of the P.R.C. invited the ABA and the Berlin Judge's Association to
    provide live trial demonstrations. Demonstrations of identical cases, a
    murder case and a commercial contract case, were performed for
    comparative purposes by ABA common law and German civil law experts.
    These trials were accompanied by extensive briefing materials. They
    were widely-publicized in the P.R.C. and are being considered for
    replication in other cities in China.
        Third, at the request of the Legal Aid Foundation of China, the ABA
    will sponsor a program of long-term support in the development of a
    system of legal aid in China. This program, to be initiated through a
    joint symposium this year, will rely on the services of ABA legal aid
    experts and comparative law advisors to present various models of legal
    services delivery as well as to provide training in practical areas to
    Chinese lawyers and paralegal personnel. The ABA's nearly 80-year
    history of support to legal services in the U.S. particularly qualifies
    it for this role.
        Fourth, the ABA through its Section of Business Law will
    collaborate with the Chinese University of Political Science and Law
    and Temple University to jointly establish a Center for the Study of
    Business Law in Beijing. The Center will offer seminars and conferences
    on U.S. and international business law to Chinese lawyers, judges,
    government officials and law students. This training will further the
    establishment of the rule of law and the development of a market
    economy in China.
        Finally, as an indication of the commitment of its leadership to
    its Goal 8, the promulgation of the rule of law in the world, the ABA
    has instituted a high-level council consisting of one of its past
    Presidents and Executive Director, a member of the Supreme Court and
    esteemed experts in legal education, legal aid and bar development
    among other areas, to oversee its activities in Asia, specifically
    China. This is the Asia Law Initiative Council (ALIC). The ABA urges
    that the U.S. commitment to bringing the rule of law to one-fifth of
    the world's population receive the priority and attention of this
    Congress through support to technical legal assistance programs in this
    appropriations process.
                    e. united nations development programme
        The ABA and UNDP share a common belief that sustainable development
    must be based upon the rule of law which fosters democratic
    institutions, respect for human rights and a vibrant private sector.
    Specifically, the ABA and UNDP have recently agreed to establish a
    jointly-funded Legal Resource Unit to provide advisory assistance
    through UNDP's 132 country offices on the legal dimensions of good
    governance and the adoption of sound macroeconomic policies. Therefore,
    to enable UNDP to carry out its important mission, it is essential that
    funding for the organization be provided at the highest possible level.
        The impact of UNDP lending can be gauged by the results of its
    programs which, over the period 1994 through 1997, convinced many
    developing countries to fully embrace market economy principles as well
    as political democratization as a foundation for social and economic
    development. UNDP's mission is to deliver high quality technical legal
    assistance to developing countries throughout the world.
                                   conclusion
        The American Bar Association encourages continued support for
    global rule of law projects that, through development of ``Legal
    Infrastructure,'' promote democracy around the world. The expectation
    of U.S. foreign assistance leverage should not be to deliver enough
    money to eliminate poverty and resolve all social-ills, but to provide
    countries the opportunity to obtain economic independence. Because the
    ABA's democratization efforts focus on respect for the rule of law and
    because of the ABA's track record of success, we continue to ask for
    U.S. support for our technical assistance programs.
        These programs encourage democracy and respect for the rule of law,
    build free markets and free trade, combat corruption and promote
    sustainable development. A strong commitment to legal and commercial
    infrastructures supports the ability of emerging markets to purchase
    U.S. products.
        The ABA fully appreciates the difficult task that your subcommittee
    has in deciding among competing interests in the fiscal year 2000
    Foreign Operations Appropriations bill. Notwithstanding, Mr. Chairman,
    we trust that the interests of the American people will be at the
    forefront of this decision.
        While it is true that the U.S. should not be expected to shoulder
    the financial burden of the international community, we are the only
    country positioned to provide international leadership. Hence, Mr.
    Chairman, the U.S. must embrace the opportunities and realities which
    the new global world offers.
        The ABA believes that its global rule of law projects are a means
    to this end. Our programs have yielded tremendous leverage on a
    relatively modest U.S. financial investment. This is largely due to the
    vast amount of free legal technical assistance available to us. A
    strong commitment to legal and commercial infrastructures supports the
    ability of emerging markets to purchase U.S. products.
        Mr. Chairman, I would like to conclude by underscoring the
    significance foreign assistance plays in achieving our international
    policy objectives. The lives of American citizens and the national
    interests of our country are far more connected with the global market
    place and political stability of other nations than any other time in
    history.
        For the reasons mentioned above, American citizens and American
    business' depend on the success of the global economy for their
    livelihood, which is fueled by the commitment to the rule of law. The
    U.S. must keep pace with the growing trend of countries toward economic
    and political transparency.
        Finally, Mr. Chairman, we respectfully urge Congress to support the
    ABA's technical legal assistance programs through the appropriations
    process.
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Michael M. Crow, Executive Vice Provost, Columbia
                                   University
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this
    opportunity to submit a statement for the hearing record for fiscal
    year 2000 funding for the Agency for International Development. The
    statement makes the case for continued funding in fiscal year 2000 of
    $500,000 for the continued development of the regional climate
    forecasting capability in the Greater Horn of Africa region, and the
    development of one other site in the southern portion of Africa. This
    is the program level of fiscal year 1999.
                     international research institute (iri)
        The International Research Institute for Climate Prediction (IRI),
    a joint initiative between Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia
    University and the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the
    University of California-San Diego. The IRI will be in the third year
    of a cooperative agreement with NOAA to develop long-range forecast
    models and capabilities related to major climate patterns and events on
    a world-wide scale. The IRI focuses on the following activities:
        --works with an extensive network of existing research centers
    around the world to provide a multi-national ``end-to-end'' climate
    prediction program on seasonal-to- interannual time scales;
        --provides forecasting and regional assessments of changing
    physical conditions (e.g., temperature and rainfall); and
        --provides the application of forecasts to support practical
    decision making in critical sectors like water resources, agriculture,
    fisheries, emergency preparedness, and public health and safety.
                                 recent funding
        In the current fiscal year, the IRI is cooperating with the Drought
    Monitoring Center (DMC) and the World Meteorological Organization in
    Nairobi, Kenya, to establish a regional climate forecasting capability.
    The joint proposal has been submitted, and we understand that approval
    will be granted in a short time.
        The IRI-DMC project has the goal of enabling the DMC to make
    operational high resolution forecasts for Kenya using a workstation
    version of the Regional Spectral Model and boundary conditions form the
    IRI model runs. Operational runs of this model can be used to improve
    the regional climate forecasts for Kenya, and potentially for the
    Greater Horn of Africa region. This capability will result in enhanced
    early warning of significant floods and draughts, and their associated
    impacts in the region. When the project is granted approval, it will
    take little time to move the workstation to Nairobi and begin the
    necessary training and model development.
        The forecasting efforts of NOAA, the IRI and other cooperating
    institutions have resulted in greatly improved lead time and capability
    in understanding Earth's complex climate system. Our capability could
    still be improved. The climate-driven events of the past five years
    have caused tremendous chaos and destruction. This accentuates the need
    for continued improvement in predictive ability. The back-to-back
    occurrence of a 100-year El Nino (1997-1998) followed by a 50-year La
    Nina (1998-1999) demonstrates the volatility of the world's climate,
    and the vulnerability of humanity to climatic aberrations.
        The IRI develops long range forecasts for NOAA on climate change.
    IRI modeling incorporates international and domestic data and modeling
    in conducting long range forecasts and the interpretation of impact. As
    NOAA and other scientific institutions develop greater capacity and
    understanding, the IRI can provide more accurate, longer range
    forecasts. The IRI is now developing projects that focus on three
    applications areas related to long range predictions: Water,
    Agriculture, and Health.
                                     water
        Water and Air are the two most important compounds for the
    sustenance of human existence. The IRI's mission focuses on water as a
    climate agent and water as a resource.
        Water availability is determined by weather and climate. Dependence
    on water, for human use, commerce, and agriculture is predicated on
    usually reliable annual averages. The reliance on water and its
    expected availability do not factor extreme climate driven variations
    into annual planning. As more is learned about the interdependence of
    extreme climate events and their world-wide effects and implications,
    we can factor long range predictions on water availability as a
    function of these events into preparatory and prescriptive actions that
    will minimize the disruption an otherwise major climate anomaly could
    cause.
        Water use has tremendous applications in society today.
    Hydroelectric power depends on a stable and predictable source of water
    at all times. Human use depends on stable supplies of potable drinking
    water and water for food preparation, hygiene, and for medical
    purposes. Agriculture, as an industry, depends on the time sensitive
    supply of water for seeding and growing. Industrial requirements for
    water range from manufacturing to construction. Transportation needs,
    apart from barge or river traffic, consume large amounts of water and
    depend heavily on water availability.
        For these reasons, the IRI has developed an application project
    that concentrates on climate-caused variations in water availability,
    from the very broad to the very local, or regional, impact. The
    benefits of this development will be seen in every aspect of man's
    interaction with the environment. Long range predictive capability
    coupled with prescriptive courses of action to accommodate and
    counteract the destructive impacts of climate events on water
    availability will result in more efficient use of resources, prevent
    disruption in major capital markets, and minimize human suffering and
    death.
                                  agriculture
        U.S. agriculture is the most vulnerable domestic industry to
    extreme climate variation. Genetically designed food and feed crops
    (corn, wheat, and soybeans) and fruits and vegetables are so refined
    that the slightest variation in water supply can destroy a season's
    product. With advance knowledge of the type and nature of a major
    climate event, appropriate steps can be taken to protect agricultural
    products and investment from suffering adverse effects due to extreme
    climate events. This applies not only to the interrelated water
    availability model for reservoir and irrigation purposes, but also in
    the decisions concerning which seed strains to use at planting and when
    the most advantageous planting time might be in a particular year.
        Foreign demand for U.S. agricultural products has a direct impact
    on commodity prices and farm income. If foreign demand for U.S.
    agricultural products changes significantly, the U.S. economy will
    reflect the variation from the commodity futures markets down to the
    level of the farm gate. Climate events such as drought can reduce
    foreign agricultural production, thereby increasing dependence on and
    demand for U.S. agricultural products and causing prices and farm
    income to rise. Conversely, if the U.S. suffered crop losses due to
    drought or flooding, major crop failures could increase domestic
    reliance on imported agricultural products, increasing the U.S.
    negative balance of trade and a concurrent increase in domestic
    agricultural prices, but loss of farm income.
        The advance knowledge of the probabilities related to foreign and
    domestic growing conditions would aid governments and planters
    immeasurably. The expected demand for products from non-domestic
    purchasing would permit farmers to make rational decisions on which
    crops to plant and in what volumes. The improved decision making
    structure for U.S. agriculture would provide more confidence, and less
    guess work, in the agricultural economy.
        The IRI focus on agriculture promises to yield returns exponential
    to the investment in the capability. The applications program is
    integrated with the water modeling discussed in the previous section.
    The two assessments are interdependent on one another.
                                     health
        Climate variation can result in dramatic health-related problems.
    Studies have shown that in years of above average moisture coupled with
    above average temperature there has been a much higher incidence of
    malaria and other water related diseases.
        The change in environmental conditions conducive to mosquito
    proliferation or water borne pathogens can greatly impact animal and
    human health, particularly when naturally occurring diseases and
    bacterial agents are permitted to grow in regions where inhabitants
    have not had to develop natural immunities to new pathogens. The
    reconstruction of some past plagues and devastating diseases can be
    traced historically to preceding major climatic events. The more
    reconstruction that IRI can develop through historical modeling, the
    more IRI will be capable of minimizing the potential threat to other
    living organisms (plants and crops as well as animals and humans).
        Water sustains all life, including microbiological diseases. The
    forecast of above normal precipitation for a region could result in an
    increase in the potential habitat for harmful diseases. The increased
    medium for disease reproduction could then lead to a greater impact on
    human lives. If both greater than normal precipitation and greater than
    normal temperature are forecast for the same region, conditions for new
    organisms to thrive in that region are greatly enhanced. The new
    organisms often are harmful to human and animal survival.
        The IRI, in conjunction with the water modeling initiative, will
    integrate regional health modeling and impact assessments in fiscal
    year 2000. This additional capability will permit public health
    precautions to be conducted--such as vaccines and preventive water
    treatment activities--long before the onset of climate-driven health
    problems begin to occur.
                                    summary
        This statement provides the current capabilities and the planned
    stages of growth for the IRI. The IRI can bring these capabilities to
    areas susceptible to extreme climate impact, and improve the quality of
    life for much of the third world. This, in turn, reduces U.S. disaster
    relief and foreign recovery costs. The cost in fiscal year 2000 for the
    continued development of the Nairobi capability for the Greater Horn of
    Africa region, and one other site within the continent of Africa, is
    estimated at the continued funding level of $500,000.
        Thank you for this opportunity to present this plan and this
    statement for the hearing record.
                                     ______

                   Prepared Statement of Rotary International
        Chairman McConnell, members of the Subcommittee, Rotary
    International appreciates this opportunity to submit testimony in
    support of the polio eradication activities of the U.S. Agency for
    International Development. Rotary International is a global association
    of more than 29,000 Rotary clubs, with a membership of over 1.2 million
    business and professional leaders in 160 countries. In the United
    States today there are some 7,500 Rotary clubs with 400,000 members.
    All of our clubs work to promote humanitarian service, high ethical
    standards in all vocations, and international understanding.
        In the United States, Rotary has formed the USA Coalition for the
    Eradication of Polio, a group of committed child health advocates which
    includes Rotary, the March of Dimes Birth Defects Foundation, the
    American Academy of Pediatrics, the Task Force for Child Survival and
    Development, and the U.S. Committee for UNICEF. These organizations
    join us in expressing our gratitude to you for your staunch support of
    the international program to eradicate polio. For the past three years,
    you have recommended that $25 million be allocated for the polio
    eradication activities of the Agency for International Development.
    This investment has helped make the United States the leader among
    donor nations in the drive to eradicate this crippling disease. The
    target year is 2000 for eradication, with certification by 2005.
        Fewer than two years remain to defeat this disease in the nations
    where the polio virus still causes death and disability. With your
    continued support, soon no child will ever be struck down by polio
    again.
                        fiscal year 2000 budget request
        For fiscal year 2000, we are again requesting that your
    Subcommittee specify $25 million for global polio eradication in
    USAID's budget, through their Polio Eradication Initiative, for the
    delivery of vaccine and the development of the infrastructure necessary
    to implement the program. This would maintain funding at the same level
    as the past three years, providing much-needed stability to the program
    and ensuring that the USA remains the decisive factor in the success of
    the global initiative. This support is needed to help meet the enormous
    costs of eradicating polio in its final stronghold--sub-Saharan Africa.
    The underdeveloped and conflict-torn countries of Africa represent the
    greatest challenges to the success of the global polio eradication
    campaign. USAID's Polio Eradication Initiative is helping many African
    nations to accelerate polio eradication activities, improve
    surveillance for polio and other diseases, and support peace-building
    cease-fires for NIDs. In addition, we are seeking report language
    similar to that included in the fiscal year 1999 Committee report,
    specifying that this funding is meant to be in addition to the
    resources for the regular immunization program of AID, and is intended
    to supplement other related activities.
        Humankind is on the threshold of victory against polio, and we must
    not miss this window of opportunity. Poliomyelitis will be the second
    major disease in history to be eradicated. The world celebrated the
    eradication of smallpox in 1979, and no child anywhere in the world
    will ever suffer from smallpox again. It is estimated that today as
    many as 20 million people around the world are living with paralysis
    from polio. The eradication of polio, achieved through your leadership,
    will not only save lives and suffering, but will also save our
    country's financial resources.
      eradicating polio will save the united states at least $230 million
                                    annually
        Last year the Chairman of the House Committee on International
    Relations commissioned the General Accounting Office to investigate the
    soundness of WHO cost estimates for the eradication or elimination of
    seven infectious diseases. The United States was a major force behind
    the successful eradication of the smallpox virus, and the GAO concluded
    that the eradication of smallpox has saved the United States some $17
    billion to date. Even greater benefits will result from the eradication
    of polio.
        Although polio-free since 1979, the United States currently spends
    at least $230 million annually to protect its newborns against the
    threat of importation of the polio virus, in addition to its investment
    in international polio eradication. Globally, over 1.5 billion U.S.
    dollars are spent annually to immunize children against polio. This
    figure does not even include the cost of treatment and rehabilitation
    of polio victims, nor the immeasurable toll in human suffering which
    polio exacts from its victims and their families. Once polio is
    eradicated and immunization against it can be discontinued, tremendous
    resources will be unfettered to focus on other health priorities.
               progress in the global program to eradicate polio
        Thanks in large part to your appropriations, the international
    effort to eradicate polio has made tremendous progress during the past
    two years.
      --The global eradication strategy is working. In 1985, when Rotary
            began its PolioPlus Program, 100 nations around the world
            suffered under the burden of polio. The Western Hemisphere has
            now been polio-free for nearly 8 years, and today polio is
            confined only to Sub-Saharan Africa, parts of the Middle East,
            and South Asia. Five of the six most populous countries in the
            world are now polio-free.
      --Some seventy-five countries conducted NIDs in 1998, immunizing over
            450 million children against polio--nearly 75 percent of the
            world's children under the age of five.
      --For 1998, the World Health Organization now expects that some 6,000
            polio cases will be reported. While this is an increase over
            the 1997 number, in fact it is a positive indication of great
            improvements in the ability to detect polio cases. Acute
            Flaccid Paralysis (AFP) surveillance, which is critical to the
            process of certification of a polio-free world, is rapidly
            improving in Africa, India and many other nations, and health
            authorities in polio-endemic countries are better able than
            ever to assess the challenges remaining to eradication.
      --Of the three types of wild poliovirus, Type 2 is on the verge of
            extinction, and is now confined only to northern India.
      --During its third year of NIDs, India was able to immunize over 130
            million children on one day--the largest public health event in
            history. Pakistan, Bangladesh, and other neighboring countries
            coordinated their NIDs with India's to achieve the maximum
            effect over the entire region. India has agreed to undertake
            extra rounds of NIDs in 1999 in order to accelerate the drive
            to eradicate polio by the target date.
      --Despite economic difficulties and civil conflict, more than 40
            African countries conducted National or Sub-National
            Immunization Days during 1997/1998, as part of the continent-
            wide ``Kick Polio Out of Africa'' campaign championed by South
            African President Nelson Mandela, reaching nearly 70 million
            children. Polio-free zones are emerging in both Northern and
            Southern Africa.
      --With the help of the world community, all remaining polio-endemic
            nations, including those in the midst of severe civil conflict,
            have now started down the path to polio eradication by
            undertaking NIDs or Sub-National Immunization Days.
      --The three-year ``Operation MECACAR'' (Middle East, Caucasus,
            Central Asian Republics) immunization campaign has been deemed
            a success, virtually eliminating polio from 19 contiguous
            countries stretching from the Middle East to Russia. For 1998,
            polio cases reported from WHO's European region have been
            confined to Southeastern Turkey.
      --China has reported no laboratory-confirmed indigenous polio cases
            for three years, and the last case of polio in the entire
            Western Pacific was detected in Cambodia in March 1997. We and
            our partners believe that the Western Pacific can be certified
            polio-free early in the year 2000.
           the role of the u.s. agency for international development
        USAID was one of the driving forces behind the eradication of polio
    in Latin America and the Caribbean. Since the certification of polio
    eradication in the Americas in 1994, AID has turned its attention to
    the polio-endemic countries of Africa and Asia, and to finding ways to
    use American expertise to enhance immunization services globally. A
    major breakthrough was the development of the heat-sensitive vaccine
    vial monitor, which is saving an estimated $10 million annually by
    reducing vaccine wastage. AID developed the monitor in conjunction with
    a private U.S. firm, at the request of World Health Organization and
    UNICEF, and it is now used on every vial of oral polio vaccine produced
    world-wide.
        In April 1996, with the support of the 104th Congress and in
    response to the strong urging of your Subcommittee, AID launched its
    own Polio Eradication Initiative, to coordinate agency-wide efforts to
    help eradicate polio by the year 2000. For the past three years,
    despite decreases in the overall Child Survival budget, Congress has
    directed that $25 million be devoted to AID's international polio
    eradication efforts. Some of AID's achievements last year, and their
    planned Polio Eradication Initiative activities in 1999, include:
      --As in fiscal year 1998, AID's Africa Bureau will provide $16
            million in 1999 for the Polio Eradication Initiative in Africa.
            These funds will flow through WHO and UNICEF for NID
            operational support, surveillance, communication, social
            mobilization, planning, training, evaluation and cold chain in
            approximately 23 countries. In 1999, special attention will
            again be given to polio eradication efforts in the Democratic
            Republic of the Congo. AID is also concentrating its financial
            and technical resources on the other major reservoirs of polio
            in Africa, including Angola, Ethiopia, and Nigeria.
      --As in 1998, AID will designate nearly $4 million to support India's
            NIDs and strengthen nationwide surveillance. AID's technical
            and programmatic expertise have been critical to the success of
            India's National Immunization Days to date. Through grants to
            UNICEF, WHO, and Rotary, AID has helped support India's cold
            chain, surveillance, training, and social mobilization efforts.
            AID has also been taking a leadership role in teaching Indian
            state health authorities how to use the polio eradication
            campaigns to improve overall immunization coverage. India
            remains the world's largest reservoir of the disease.
      --An additional $5 million will again be programmed through AID's
            Center for Population, Health and Nutrition. These funds will
            be used for surveillance and training in 4 South Asian and some
            10 European countries, through the WHO Regional Offices, and to
            support communication and research concerning vaccination
            issues. Support is also being provided to the Voice of America
            and WORLDNET Television, for broadcasting on polio eradication,
            surveillance, and other immunization topics, and some funds are
            also earmarked for emergency vaccine transport.
      --AID, through the U.S.-Japan Common Agenda, has encouraged Japan to
            take a more active role in international polio eradication
            activities. One result of the Common Agenda is that Japan is
            now sending trained volunteers into the field to assist with
            country-level surveillance activities, just as AID has involved
            U.S. Peace Corps volunteers in these activities. AID has also
            supported a new initiative to engage Private Voluntary
            Organizations (PVOs) already active in polio-endemic countries
            in the polio surveillance effort.
      --Through its Polio Eradication Initiative, AID is also helping to
            build peace. AID has helped both Angola and the Democratic
            Republic of the Congo in planning and conducting polio
            eradication activities despite ongoing civil conflict. In the
            D.R. Congo, the only populous polio-endemic country which has
            not conducted full NIDs, warring factions have now agreed to
            ``days of tranquillity'' in order to allow immunization
            campaigns to take place in July and August. AID is helping with
            planning and operational support for these historic NIDs.
                      other benefits of polio eradication
        Increased political and financial support for childhood
    immunization has many documented long-term benefits. Polio eradication
    is helping countries to develop public health and disease surveillance
    systems useful in the control of other vaccine-preventable infectious
    diseases. Already, much of Latin America is free of measles, due in
    part to improvements in the public health infrastructure implemented
    during the war on polio. As a result of this success, measles has been
    targeted for eradication in the Americas by the year 2000. The disease
    surveillance system--the network of laboratories and trained personnel
    built up during the Polio Eradication Initiative--is now being used to
    track measles, Chagas, neonatal tetanus, and other deadly infectious
    diseases. NIDs have been used as an opportunity to give children
    essential vitamin A, as well as polio vaccine. The campaign to
    eliminate polio from communities has led to increased public awareness
    of the benefits of immunization, creating a ``culture of immunization''
    and resulting in increased usage of primary health care and higher
    immunization rates for other vaccines. It has improved public health
    communications and taught nations important lessons about vaccine
    storage and distribution, and the logistics of organizing nation-wide
    health programs. Lastly, the unprecedented cooperation between the
    public and private sectors serves as a model for other public health
    initiatives.
            resources needed to finish the job of polio eradication
        The World Health Organization now estimates that approximately $890
    million in external funds is needed to help polio-endemic countries
    carry out the polio eradication strategy during the critical years
    1999-2001. The estimated shortfall for the three years 1999-2001 now
    stands at nearly $370 million. In the Americas, some 80 percent of the
    cost of polio eradication efforts was borne by the national governments
    themselves. However, as the battle against polio is taken to the
    poorest, least-developed nations on earth, and those in the midst of
    civil conflict, many of the remaining polio-endemic nations can
    contribute only a small percentage of the needed funds. In some
    countries, up to 100 percent of the NID and other polio eradication
    costs must be met by external donor sources. We are asking that the
    United States continue to take the leadership role in meeting this
    shortfall.
        The United States' commitment to polio eradication has stimulated
    other countries to increase their support. Belgium, Canada, Germany,
    Finland, Italy, and Norway are among those countries which have
    followed America's lead and have recently announced special grants for
    the global Polio Eradication Initiative. Japan and Australia are major
    donors in Asia and the Western Pacific, and Japan has also expanded its
    support to polio eradication efforts in Africa. Denmark, Germany and
    the United Kingdom have made major grants that will help India
    eradicate polio by the target year 2000. In addition, last summer U.K.
    Prime Minister Tony Blair announced a grant of U.S. $30 million to
    ensure that Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda also meet the eradication goal.
        By the time polio has been eradicated, Rotary International expects
    to have expended approximately $500 million on the effort--the largest
    private contribution to a public health initiative ever. Of this, $334
    million has already been allocated for polio vaccine, operational
    costs, laboratory surveillance, cold chain, training and social
    mobilization in 120 countries. Over the past 18 months, realizing the
    increased role which external donors need to play in order to ensure
    that polio eradication is not jeopardized due to lack of resources, The
    Rotary Foundation has committed an additional $40 million to its
    PolioPlus fund. More importantly, we have mobilized tens of thousands
    of Rotarians to work together with their national ministries of health,
    UNICEF and WHO, and with health providers at the grassroots level in
    thousands of communities.
        Polio eradication is an investment, but few investments are as
    risk-free or can guarantee such an immense return. The world will begin
    to ``break even'' on its investment in polio eradication only two years
    after the virus has been vanquished. The financial and humanitarian
    benefits of polio eradication will accrue forever. This will be our
    gift to the children of the twenty-first century.
        Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony.
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of Rotary Foundation of Rotary International
        The mission of The Rotary Foundation is to support the efforts of
    Rotary International to achieve world understanding and peace through
    international humanitarian, educational and cultural exchange programs.
        The Rotary Foundation of Rotary International was the recipient of
    one Federal grant in recent years: a U.S. Agency for International
    Development Child Survival (CSVIII) grant, for the period 1 October
    1992 to 30 September 1996. This grant, in the amount of $2,650,200, was
    for polio immunization projects in India and Nigeria, as well as
    administrative expenses, and is now closed. Neither Rotary
    International nor The Rotary Foundation have received any federal
    grants or contracts since October 1, 1996. However, for fiscal year
    1997 and fiscal year 1998, the India National PolioPlus Committee
    received U.S. $400,000 in USAID Child Survival funding, through UNICEF,
    and is expected to receive the same amount in fiscal year 1999.
                                     ______

                                     ______

                      Prepared Statement of Dr. Rob Manoff
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, on behalf of New York
    University and the National Press Institute of Russia, the major
    initiative undertaken by NYU's Center for War, Peace, and the News
    Media, I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for your
    previous support of our work.
        We have been gratified by this Subcommittee's staunch endorsement
    of media assistance programs, most recently in House Report 105-719,
    which, inter alia, supported ``training in commercial management with
    emphasis on financial skills, basic and advanced journalism training,
    and development of an independent media infrastructure.'' The
    continuing interest of this Subcommittee in such programs will remain
    critical to their continued implementation and success in the years to
    come.
        I very much appreciate the opportunity to provide testimony to this
    Subcommittee today, and would like to offer the following comments as a
    journalist, an academic, and the founder and director of an NGO that
    has been providing media assistance in the former Soviet Union and
    Central and Eastern Europe since 1985--longer than any other
    organization operating in the region.
        While the fundamental sectoral assistance approach that has been
    developed over many years by the National Press Institute (NPI) remains
    valid, the present economic crisis in Russia clearly requires that
    efforts to assist the independent media be reviewed and refocused. In
    light of this fact, NPI has been vigorously reassessing its current
    activity and developing new programmatic initiatives continuously since
    the crisis began in August. As part of this process, NPI has issued two
    detailed analytical studies of the crisis and its effects on
    independent regional newspapers, as well as a comprehensive
    programmatic Newspaper Crisis Recovery Program.
        The National Press Institute believes that the present crisis will
    continue to impact the independent press for many years to come.
    Moreover, as Russia moves into the upcoming national election season,
    new dimensions of the media crisis will emerge, presenting new
    challenges that bear upon the fate of the entire political-economic
    transition of the country. As a permanent media-assistance organization
    that is on the ground throughout Russia every day working with the
    entire media sector, NPI has undertaken continuous monitoring of the
    media crisis and the implications of this crisis for the future of
    Russia and the success of American policy, and I would like to share
    some of our findings with you today.
                      the six crises of the russian media
        These findings are striking taken individually, but the cumulative
    impact of the collapse of the advertising market, the dramatic drop in
    subscription sales, the decline in the size of papers and their
    frequency of publication, the laying off of key journalistic and
    editorial staff, and a raft of other crisis consequences that NPI has
    documented--this cumulative impact is even more fraught with danger for
    the processes of democratization and marketization in the country. In
    the aggregate, in fact, the Russian media--and with it the country
    itself--are now facing six crises of fateful import:
        The Economic Crisis.--Like all sectors in Russia, the newspaper
    industry has been rocked by the economic effects of the post-August
    crisis, as described above.
        The Information Crisis.--The economic crisis has forced newspapers
    to reduce staff and to cancel subscriptions to information sources such
    as news agencies. As a result, the economic crisis has become a
    journalistic crisis and newspapers are less able than ever to provide
    the information that society needs. NPI seeks to develop a variety of
    mechanisms (on-line journalism, database development, briefings and
    press conferences, publications, establishing contacts among newspapers
    in different regions, etc.) to increase the volume and quality of
    information available to Russian journalists and the public. NPI
    understands that simply helping publishers resolve their business
    problems will not enable them to survive if they are not able to
    produce products that readers need and want.
        The Social Crisis.--Such a dramatic collapse of the economy as
    Russia has experienced inevitably will have serious social
    consequences. This is especially true in a country like Russia which is
    composed of many ethnic and religious communities and which has a long,
    troubled history of intolerance and xenophobia. Since August, observers
    have noted with alarm a dramatic increase in anti-Semitism and in pro-
    fascist activity. NPI has observed intensified ethnic conflict in many
    regions and has received, for instance, a heart-rending appeal from
    publishers in the Northern Caucasus for assistance in helping to
    diffuse ethnic tensions before violence again engulfs that part of the
    country. In this region at least, publishers feel that social unrest is
    more immediate threat to their newspapers than the economic
    consequences of the crisis. While these are not issues that can be
    resolved by effective and responsible journalism, they certainly will
    never be resolved without it.
        The Political Crisis.--NPI and the publishers with which it works
    recognize that the upcoming parliamentary (1999) and presidential
    (2000) elections represent a significant threat to the independence of
    the regional media B a threat that looms larger because of the
    economic, political and social turmoil provoked by the crisis. NPI
    believes that journalists must be given guidance and resources to
    enable them to resist both political pressure and financial incentives
    during the campaigns, and to keep the needs and interests of their
    readers at the center of their election coverage.
        The Legal Crisis.--As a result of their weakened financial position
    and the strained political atmosphere engendered by the crisis,
    newspapers are more subject than ever to intimidation through legal
    action by the authorities and other interests. Publishers have
    repeatedly told NPI that they need organized and systematic assistance
    in such areas as business law, advertising law and the registration of
    organizations.
        The Professional Crisis.--The overall weakness demonstrated by
    independent newspapers in the present environment points to significant
    shortcomings in the level of journalistic professionalism throughout
    the country. Newspapers cannot recover from their economic
    difficulties, cannot resist political and criminal pressure and cannot
    play a stabilizing social role if they are unable to win and retain the
    confidence of the public. The National Press Institute emphasizes the
    importance of targeted programs designed to improve the professional
    and responsible presentation of information, such as the NPI Nuclear
    Security Program, its ethics programs and its long-running initiative
    on the coverage of ethnic conflict.
                why media assistance dollars will not be wasted
        Most experts agree that it will be many years before Russia
    recovers from the shock of the present crisis. However, they also agree
    that new opportunities may have been created to correct the structural
    flaws that provoked the crisis in the first place. In this context, it
    is impossible to exaggerate the importance of the non-state regional
    press. Commercial newspapers play an active role in stimulating local
    economic development, in ferreting out and eliminating corruption and
    other obstacles to investment and, perhaps most importantly, in keeping
    the public informed and engaged in democratization and the economic
    transformation process. Although it is clear that the present crisis in
    Russia represents a serious, long-term setback for privately owned
    newspapers, publishers have not thrown up their hands in despair.
    Instead, they have rolled up their sleeves and responded to the
    situation with reasonable and well-considered crisis-management
    measures, although most of them will have a very hard time bearing
    further shocks and recovering from the present one without assistance.
    They are putting their available resources to excellent use and making
    heroic efforts with precious little support. They are more than ever
    ready to learn from the experience of other countries and from one
    another, more than ever taking themselves seriously as entrepreneurs
    and seeking sensible, market-oriented solutions to their problems. They
    are now acutely aware of the need to rebuild their businesses by
    increasing revenue, cutting costs, and providing a better product, and
    are more eager than ever before to do what is necessary to finally
    establish their newspapers on the basis of sound business practices,
    aggressive marketing, and quality journalism that truly responds to the
    public interest.
        The publishers of non-state newspapers in Russia belong to the
    emerging class of Russians who neither seek nor expect assistance from
    the state. Their confidence has been badly shaken by the present
    crisis, but their determination to overcome remains strong. It is
    indicative that only a tiny minority of the papers that NPI works with
    have approached local authorities for subsidies, while almost all have
    approached NPI for assistance in managing advertising, circulation,
    human resources and the like. A publisher from southern Russia recently
    told NPI, There is no point in waiting for state support or subsidies.
    I have to rely on myself and to actively seek out market-oriented
    solutions to my problems.
        Considering this frame of mind, it is not surprising that the
    crisis has actually produced some positive effects. For example: Some
    publishers have intensified their focus on local advertising sales,
    looking to increase their base of small advertisers instead of relying
    on a few larger clients; other publishers have increased their control
    over single-copy sales and newspaper distribution generally, reducing
    waste and returns and increasing revenue; and yet other publishers have
    begun to think actively about how they can make their newspapers
    essential to readers who now have even less disposable income than
    before.
        However, daunting obstacles remain and another election season is
    looming in Russia. Publishers fear these elections even more than the
    economic crisis. They know that with each election, the confidence of
    citizens in political reform and in the media declines, further eroding
    their strength. They understand that, no matter what assurances may be
    uttered, all too few Russian politicians are deeply committed to the
    development of an open society. In the wake of the economic crisis,
    commercial newspapers in Russia enter the election season in a
    seriously vulnerable condition.
                     what kind of assistance is needed now
        NPI's analysis of the present situation in Russia suggests a number
    of concrete actions that could and should be undertaken to resuscitate
    the non-state regional newspaper industry in the wake of the present
    crisis and to lay the foundations for a viable independent press in
    Russia. In order to do so, it is necessary for non-state newspapers
    with the guidance and assistance of Western media professionals B to
    work together in a concerted fashion to (1) increase revenues by
    increasing advertising market share and circulation, (2) decrease costs
    through more efficient management, (3) improve the legal and regulatory
    environment through lobbying and legal and tax reform, and (4) improve
    journalistic practices and standards and heighten the media's sense of
    public responsibility to the public. With these goals in mind, NPI
    believes that the following specific initiatives are required to assist
    Russia's regional media in responding to the crisis: Targeted newspaper
    consulting programs should be expanded and intensified.Experience has
    clearly shown that Western management expertise in the areas of
    advertising sales, marketing and promotion, circulation and financial
    management is directly applicable to Russia and that exposure to these
    methods brings tangible benefits to Russian newspapers.
      --Programs must be developed to expand the share of the national
            advertising market enjoyed by regional newspapers. A central
            advertising representation and the development of a coordinated
            schedule of thematic supplements (health, computers, travel,
            etc.) are the most promising places to begin this work.
      --Advertisers and newspaper managers need much more reliable
            information about newspaper readership and potential
            readership. Newspapers must be assisted in designing and
            executing research programs and in using research to market
            their newspapers to advertisers. Newspaper managers must be
            assisted in developing concrete strategies for selling
            newspaper advertising in competition with other media,
            especially street advertising, national magazines and radio.
      --Methods of increasing the exchange of information among publishers,
            including especially information about effective marketing
            initiatives and programs designed to increase reader
            participation in the community, should be developed.
      --A coordinated legal service for independent newspapers, including
            media law and business law, should be initiated. Special
            attention should be given to problems faced by state-controlled
            newspapers seeking to be privatized.
      --A detailed lobbying agenda for non-state newspapers should be
            developed and presented to the industry for discussion and,
            possibly, action. The primary issues that must be addressed are
            state subsidies to the media and the unfair competition that
            they cause, state control over newspaper printing presses,
            access to information and methods of using tax legislation to
            stimulate advertising in private newspapers.
      --The industry should be monitored carefully in order to assess the
            impact of the present crisis on subscription revenues. It may
            be crucial to create emergency mechanisms for infusing working
            capital into the industry.
      --Programs should be implemented to facilitate discussion of the
            impact of upcoming elections on the media and the role of
            independent newspapers in covering the political process.
            Newspapers should be given the opportunity to create programs
            that increase public confidence in the processes of democracy
            and reform.
      --Concentrated efforts must be undertaken to vastly expand access to
            high-quality newspaper printing throughout the country. Loan
            funds, guarantee funds, franchising and especially leasing
            mechanisms should be considered in order to give newspapers the
            maximum opportunity either to own their own presses or at least
            to have a choice of where to print.
                    the role of the national press institute
        In line with these recommendations, the National Press Institute is
    now working with the United States Agency for International Development
    and a range of other funding and programmatic organizations, including
    the United States Information Agency, to implement an aggressive
    program in the country. This program builds on NPI's seven years of
    experience as a permanent, nationwide, Russian NGO dedicated to
    developing the emerging independent and professional mass media as a
    pillar of a stable, democratic civil society in Russia
        Begun as a project of New York University in 1992, NPI is now an
    independent Russian NGO with 45 staff members in six sites throughout
    Russia[2], all but one of whom are Russian nationals. It has organized
    over 3000 programs in 40 cities across Russia, with an aggregate
    attendance of over 135,000 journalists, media managers, and other
    professionals. It applies a unique sectoral strategy based on a
    comprehensive approach to the economic, political, professional,
    educational, and legal problems facing the media.
        In the years since it was established by the NYU Center for War,
    Peace, and the News Media, the National Press Institute has provided
    management training and consulting to thousands of newspapers
    throughout the country, leading directly in some cases to full
    financial independence from the local authorities. Through training and
    provision of information it has helped thousands of journalists to
    improve their reporting on key issues. It has promoted inclusive and
    broad-based journalism that both promotes a diversity of viewpoints and
    encourages civil society. It has championed the cause of freedom of
    information in Russia. It has arranged lasting partnerships between
    Russian and American newspapers. In these and a host of other ways too
    numerous to summarize here, NPI has employed its sectoral strategy to
    promote the development of a stronger, more democratic, and sustainable
    independent media sector.
        In implementing the strategy that has been adumbrated here, NPI
    will rely on the consummate Russian media professionals who staff the
    six departments that will continue to be called upon to design and
    implement the assistance programs that respond to the sectoral crisis:
      --The NPI Business Development Service provides consulting, training,
            professional information, and other services and support to
            media organizations seeking to attract financing, develop
            business plans, improve their management, or in other ways
            improve their financial viability and attract capital. In the
            coming year, it will mange NPI's programs to create a
            centralized advertising representation for regional newspapers
            in Moscow; to launch a legal service to provide assistance on
            business-law issues; and to expand its management consulting
            programs, using both American and Russian media management
            professionals.
      --The NPI School of Media Management and Journalism operates courses
            on journalism and the newspaper business at all NPI locations,
            and is becoming Russia's major mid-career training institute
            for the print media. In the coming year, it will serve hundreds
            of media professionals with mid-career training to help them
            manage the aftermath of the crisis through courses in
            advertising management, newspaper marketing, electoral
            coverage, legal journalism, and reporting on the economic and
            political issues involved in the crisis itself.
      --The NPI Center for Cyberjournalism is Russia's premiere institution
            devoted to providing training and consulting in new technology
            applications for the media. The Center for Cyberjournalism also
            organizes the only annual conference in the former Soviet Union
            devoted to promoting Internet use and Web publishing by
            journalists and publishers; it also offers a range of other
            information and consulting services and publications. Its
            Internet Media Service is becoming a prime delivery vehicle for
            a spectrum of informational and assistance services and
            resources, and during the coming year the cyberjournalism
            program will focus on responding to the post-crisis needs of
            the media through its educational and training programs and
            Internet resources.
      --NPI undertakes Special Projects to respond to particular needs or
            opportunities in the Russian media sector, such as improving
            coverage of critical nuclear issues and working with
            journalists to promote the values of tolerance and pluralism
            necessary for the success of democratic governance in a multi-
            ethnic and multi-confessional society. NPI's Nuclear Reporting
            Program has worked since 1992 to promote coverage of nuclear
            security and safety, arms control, proliferation, and export
            issues on the part of the Russian media. The efforts of the
            program will be enhanced during the coming year, during which
            time NPI will also be inaugurating a series of initiatives
            devoted to encouraging informed, honest, objective, and
            sophisticated coverage of the forthcoming parliamentary and
            presidential election campaigns.
      --The NPI Press Centers organize hundreds of briefings, press
            conferences, and roundtables every year, featuring a wide range
            of political leaders, economists, civic leaders, journalists,
            NGO activists, and a range of other newsmakers and experts.
            During the coming year it will focus especially on providing
            information to independent media that can no longer afford to
            subscribe to non-government information sources; on furnishing
            information on all aspects of the crisis itself in order to
            promote complex coverage of the economic and political issues
            involved; and on providing a forum for candidates, citizen
            groups, and experts on the issues during the forthcoming
            campaigns.
      --Finally, the NPI Research Center monitors, studies, and publicizes
            economic, political, and journalistic issues and trends in the
            Russian media sector. Over the next year the Research Center
            will continue to monitor closely the impact of the crisis on
            the Russian media and will examine the efforts of Russia's
            media managers to handle its consequences and improve the
            viability of the regional media sector.
        As NPI continues to monitor developments in the media sector and in
    Russian society at large, it is natural that its sectoral analysis and
    programmatic responses will constantly evolve in response to changing
    circumstances and the new problems and opportunities they reveal.
        Meanwhile, the National Press Institute has crafted its complex of
    responses to the post-August crisis in Russia with the goal of using
    limited resources in a way that will have nationwide impact on the key
    problems facing independent newspapers and Russia's emerging civil
    society. Nonetheless, it is necessary to keep in mind the tremendous
    scale of the challenges presented by the crisis. Now is frankly not the
    moment for pilot projects, under-funded half-measures or programs that
    do not go to the heart of the issues confronting the media. The present
    crisis compels us to be bold and imaginative in our thinking and
    energetic in our response.
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Dr. Lawrence A. Feldman, Acting Senior Vice
    President for Academic Affairs, University of Medicine and Dentistry of
                                   New Jersey
        Mr. Chairman, I respectfully submit testimony of the University of
    Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ), the largest public health
    sciences university in the nation. The UMDNJ statewide system is
    located on five academic campuses and consists of 3 medical school, and
    schools of dentistry, nursing, health related professions, graduate
    biomedical sciences and our latest school--the School of Public Health.
    UMDNJ also comprises a University-owned acute care hospital, three core
    teaching hospitals, an integrated behavioral health care delivery
    system, a statewide system for managed care and affiliations with more
    than 100 health care and educational institutions statewide. No other
    institution in the nation possesses resources which match our scope in
    higher education, health care delivery, research and community service
    initiatives with state, federal and local entities.
        I appreciate this opportunity to bring to your attention a priority
    project of UMDNJ that is consistent with the mission of this committee,
    and that is to counter the threat of chemical and biological terrorism.
        In our complex world of instant communication and ease of global
    transportation, disaffected individuals or political groups have access
    to highly destructive weapons of terror. With our open society the
    United States is particularly at risk to an individual with a grudge, a
    band of ideologically motivated fanatics, or to nations seeking
    revenge. The possibility of the employment of weapons of mass
    destruction on an innocent population has already become a reality with
    the Sarin nerve gas attack in the subways of Tokyo.
        State and local governments and health organizations need reliable
    information upon which to develop and coordinate response plans for
    contingencies due to weapons of mass destruction. They need programs to
    educate planners and response teams on the public health aspects of
    these threats and how to recognize and respond to them. In addition,
    they need to understand both the short and long term implications for
    human and ecologic health. To develop such a plan requires a broad base
    of scientific and educational expertise. Scientific expertise is also
    needed to devise approaches for the early detection and treatment of
    biological and chemical weapons of terror.
        As the nation's most densely populated state, we in New Jersey have
    a particular concern about being targets of bio- and chemo-terrorist
    activities. Our communities abut each other and our traffic patterns
    are statewide making us especially vulnerable to infectious disease.
    There are no obvious geographical boundaries to readily institute a
    quarantine. Our central location as a transportation hub for the
    populous Northeast also makes us a prime target.
        Terrorists have three types of weapons available to them. For one,
    explosive devices, although increasingly deadly, our society has
    developed emergency response approaches to deal with, including
    explosions caused by sources as varied as factory processes and gas
    mains. The other two types of terrorist weapons are relatively new and
    present particular challenges to our normal response processes. These
    are chemical weapons of terror, such as nerve gas, and biological
    weapons of terror, such as anthrax bacillis. Chemical and biological
    weapons differ dramatically from explosions in that for these newer
    threats early recognition and diagnosis is crucial for both those
    initially affected and for others who might yet be affected through
    spread of infection or contact with the chemical. Education of
    emergency responders to correctly identify these threats is crucial to
    minimize the impact of biological and chemical weapons, as well as to
    protecting the emergency responders themselves. Compounding our
    problems is the need for a better understanding of the effects of
    likely chemical and biological agents of terrorism, and of the means to
    prevent their spread and treat their victims.
        We respectfully make four recommendations for the committee's
    consideration: (1) Provide funding for a major program aimed at
    improving the recognition of the effects of chemical and biological
    terrorism weapons by community emergency response elements. (2) Unify
    the approaches to educating emergency responders about chemical and
    biological terrorism. These two types of weapons present similar
    challenge and it would be inefficient to develop separate initiatives
    for these threats. (3) Take advantage of existing expertise in training
    emergency responders in medically-related issues that has been
    developed for hazardous chemicals and wastes through the NIOSH Training
    Centers. There have already been used for pass through funding from
    DOE, EPA and NIH to train emergency responders; and, (4) Provide
    funding for research derived specifically at understanding the heath
    effects of chemical and biological agents of terror so that early
    diagnosis and treatment becomes more likely.
        The nation's foremost program in education and training concerning
    chemical and physical threats is headed by a UMDNJ faculty member, Dr.
    Audrey Gotsch, who is currently President of the American Public Health
    Association. Among her programs is the Center for Education and
    Training which provides training concerning chemical and physical
    agents to more than 160,000 police, firefighters, municipal and state
    employees, as well as to physicians, nurses and industrial hygienists.
        Because of its scientific expertise, UMDNJ is uniquely qualified to
    develop a program to educate state and municipal governments, emergency
    responders and health and hospital professionals on planning for the
    response to terrorism and training personnel to deal with threats of
    terrorism and how they affect public health.
        We respectfully seek $1.5 million through the Agency for
    International Development (USAID) to expand our research, education and
    training programs in response to threats of chemical and biological
    terrorism.
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of Jim Moody, President, InterAction, American
                   Council for Voluntary International Action
        Mr. Chairman, Senator Leahy, and other members of the Subcommittee,
    I am grateful for the opportunity to testify before this distinguished
    Subcommittee about foreign operations spending within the fiscal year
    2000 budget proposal.
        InterAction is a coalition of over 160 U.S.-based non-profit
    organizations working to promote human dignity, reduce poverty,
    alleviate suffering, and help people to help themselves in 165
    countries around the world. I am here today to recommend a foreign
    operations appropriations bill that adequately funds needs for disaster
    relief, sustainable development, as well as resettlement and protection
    programs for refugees and victims of civil conflict.
        Mr. Chairman, in my allotted 5 minutes, the world's population will
    have grown by almost twice the number of members in the 106th Congress,
    or about 1,000 children. In the course of this Congress, the world's
    population will add approximately 160 million children, mostly in the
    developing world, who will be faced with deep poverty, little education
    or job prospects, political turmoil and exposure to preventable
    diseases. Without intending to disparage the admirable and significant
    steps taken by this Subcommittee under the able leadership of its Chair
    and ranking minority member to meet the world's challenges, I desire to
    reemphasize the weight of the issues at hand as we enter the 21st
    century.
        History shows that debates in Congress surrounding U.S. foreign
    assistance are highly charged and I suspect the fiscal year 2000 budget
    deliberations will be no different, which is healthy and welcome in a
    democratic republic. I believe that efforts to cut foreign humanitarian
    assistance are not supported by the facts and would be shortsighted.
    Wise and targeted foreign assistance often carried out in a public-
    private partnership with NGOs is cost effective, prevents far higher
    costs later, supports America's other foreign policy goals, and
    embodies America's best traditions. I would like to emphasize three
    points:
      --U.S. relief, sustainable development and refugee resettlement,
            protection and assistance programs abroad work and have shown
            very impressive results to date
      --This type of assistance mentioned above is in our nation's direct
            self-interest and consistent with our country's humanitarian
            values
      --There must be a set of principles that steer the way we deliver
            foreign aid.
                                assistance works
        Those who say wise and thoughtful foreign aid does not work are
    demonstrably wrong. The facts show otherwise. Over the years, these
    programs have laid the cornerstones of democracy, created vibrant
    trading markets, cut child mortality more than in half, protected the
    fertility and reproductive health of women, doubled literacy rates and
    helped educate many millions of children. These programs have increased
    life expectancy 37 percent from 46 to 63 years in the poorest
    countries, immunized 80 percent of children under two and given more
    than 1 billion people access to safe drinking water.
        InterAction's organizations are directly involved in these
    successes and continue to provide relief for millions of refugees,
    internally displaced persons and other victims of natural and human-
    made disasters. Our members have been instrumental in increasing the
    poor's access to micro-credit and other financial services and
    assisting babies and children who sadly have been left orphaned by AIDS
    and other terrible diseases and events. The list of successfully
    combating poverty, disease, and other issues is long but one message
    stands out--these programs work to improve the lives of millions. The
    best kind of foreign aid has the well-being of people at its center,
    and there are so many successful programs initiated by our members that
    help do just that.
             why help the developing world & successful foreign aid
        Some still question the efficacy of humanitarian and development
    assistance programs, so it is important to articulate why we should
    continue to make investments abroad. The status of developing nations
    and of their citizens, directly impacts U.S. national security and
    economic prosperity. Either we help to equip the world's poor and their
    governments with the long-term tools necessary to overcome their
    plight, or we isolate ourselves and lose the opportunity to reduce
    violence, economic turmoil, political instability, and environmental
    degradation in the world. While private capital flows are increasingly
    important to the economic development of some 12-14 nations, our
    interest extends far beyond the few. As I'm sure you know, according to
    the OECD more than 75 percent of private capital flow is concentrated
    in just 12 countries. The problems of rapid population growth,
    environmental degradation, infectious diseases, mass migration,
    narcotics, transshipment and terrorism know no borders.
        The United States must take leadership in addressing the problems
    facing the developing world in order to meet our own foreign policy and
    security objectives. Our children's and our grandchildren's futures
    will be largely shaped by the decisions made today.
        The very fact is this: As nations prosper, their citizens become
    consumers of U.S. goods, creating new American jobs. U.S. exports to
    the developing world have more than doubled in the past decade, and
    these nations represent the fastest growing markets for American goods.
    The Asian markets that have recently undergone much economic stress
    indicate the great stake the U.S. has in maintaining the vibrancy of
    these markets.
        United States assistance to developing nations can directly help
    build peace, prosperity, and democratic values. Democratic societies
    seldom attack one another, and so heightened security and crisis
    prevention is preferable to costly interventions and reconstruction.
    Thus, development assistance to advance wider participation, enhanced
    democracy, greater accountability, and good governance is clearly in
    America's national interest.
        Finally, assisting developing nations and their people is
    consistent with our humanitarian values, and wise assistance conforms
    to the ideals and principles on which this nation was founded. For the
    InterAction community, the humanitarian imperative comes first. To
    quote Ronald Reagan, ``the hungry child knows no politics.'' Most
    Americans feel this way and believe we have a moral commitment to help
    the over one billion people who live on less than one dollar a day.
    Studies of U.S. public opinion have found a large majority of Americans
    do indeed support full international engagement to reduce suffering,
    prevent crisis, and higher foreign assistance than we in fact provide.
        Americans in Kentucky, Vermont, Pennsylvania and across this
    country give generously to international humanitarian causes and
    disaster relief, and support channeling government funds through non-
    governmental organizations as cost-effective providers of humanitarian
    assistance. Investments in human potential have given people the
    skills, knowledge, and well-being they need to help themselves and
    overcome poverty.
         refocusing disaster relief, sustainable development, refugee
      resettlement and protection assistance--a set of guiding principles
        Let me explain more specifically what principles this dynamic
    community of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) views as guiding
    their decisions about aid to the developing world. I believe Congress
    would be well-served to follow these principles, or criteria, as it
    weighs decisions related on the fiscal year 2000 budget.
        InterAction's community of U.S. non-governmental organizations has
    decades of on the ground experience designing and carrying out
    successful development, relief, and refugee assistance programs in very
    poor nations. Based on this experience, these NGOs have adopted the
    following principles for development assistance programs:
        The primary goals of development assistance must be poverty
    reduction.--Persistent poverty is the single most critical development
    challenge. There is no way to isolate poverty. Its impact can be felt
    across an entire society and--in an increasingly interdependent world--
    the entire global community. Deep poverty deprives society of the
    potential of those who are disadvantaged and leads to a host of
    problems, including hunger, social instability, the spread of
    infectious diseases, exceptionally rapid population growth, increased
    migration, and environmental degradation.
        People-centered development requires both human and economic
    development.--Investments that build human capacity (i.e., health and
    education) are the foundation for economic growth, while broad-based
    economic growth helps sustain investments in human capacity. The key is
    equitable growth: research shows that promoting equity strengthens
    economic growth.
        Popular participation in a strong civil society is vital to sustain
    progress and hold governments and other actors accountable.--For
    development assistance to work, it must be directed toward efforts that
    its beneficiaries identify, design, and value. True development must
    reach beyond economic empowerment toward the creation of a strong civil
    society in which people have a voice in political and economic
    decision-making. In countries where governments are not committed to
    the rule of law and accountability, NGOs may be the only vehicles for
    effective assistance.
        Gender equity should be an integral part of development practice
    and a key goal of development programs.--Of the 1.7 billion people
    worldwide living in poverty, 70 percent are women and children.
    Economic growth has failed many women, who continue to hold jobs with
    low pay and poor working conditions. They suffer disproportionately
    from violence, illiteracy, malnutrition, overwork, and injustice. They
    lack access to health care and education, and are under-represented in
    official decision-making. Yet all evidence suggests that enabling women
    to improve their lives is one of the best ways to improve the well-
    being of their families and communities. Special efforts are needed to
    remove the legal, cultural, and resource barriers facing women, and to
    give women more access to credit, land, education, and other resources
    necessary for sustainable livelihoods. Women need to be more involved
    in decision-making if they are to become more effective agents of
    social change.
        Partnerships between donors and (1) NGOs, (2) recipient
    governments, and (3) the private enterprise sector are needed for
    balanced and effective development assistance programs.--For aid to
    reach the people most in need, a significant portion should be
    channeled through international and local NGOs, which have a long
    record of proven effectiveness in grassroots development, innovation,
    and civil-society building. Governments play a critical role, however,
    in fostering a supportive legal and regulatory environment and
    providing the infrastructure and resources for human development. So
    too does the private sector, which serves as the engine of economic
    growth, providing the technology and capital that no other sector can.
        Government policy is important: the best development partners are
    those nations that respect human rights and the rule of law, promote
    democratic practices, and commit to people-centered development.--A
    nation's need and governance should both weigh heavily in decisions
    about aid allocations. Good governance, including appropriate economic
    policies and commitment of national resources to development
    objectives, greatly enhances the prospects for effective use of aid
    resources, particularly in the case of government-to-government
    programs.
        Any effective program must include disaster relief and refugee aid,
    as well as transition assistance for countries that are emerging from
    conflict or state-controlled economies.--The humanitarian values held
    by so many Americans compel the U.S. government to help people
    suffering from natural or man-made disasters. Our national interest in
    a peaceful and prosperous world demands that we offer assistance to
    war-ravaged countries or those making the precarious transition to
    democratic governance and free-market economies.
        Bilateral and multilateral aid should be seen as complementary
    programs, and be better coordinated.--Bilateral and multilateral aid
    programs are not trade-offs, but complementary approaches that make
    distinct contributions to development. Efforts should be made, however,
    to reform and streamline these programs to avoid duplication. Aid works
    best when donors work together, each using its comparative strengths to
    achieve agreed-upon goals to which both governments and citizens are
    committed.
        Development assistance should be part of a broader policy agenda
    that includes trade, private investment, debt relief, and other
    economic programs.--To forge more consistent and synergistic
    international economic policies, we need to view development assistance
    in a much broader context. The oft-quoted distinction between ``trade
    and aid'' relies more on rhyme than reason. Although it is both
    possible and desirable for countries to graduate from aid and develop
    relationships based solely on trade and investment, long-term aid
    programs are often essential to help the poorest countries cement the
    foundation for private investment and increased trade.
        Having stated the above principles they clearly suggest that U.S.
    development assistance should focus on four key areas that I hope this
    subcommittee will use as a guide as it considers the foreign operations
    portion of the fiscal year 2000 request:
        Promoting human development and equitable economic growth.--Both
    are key ingredients in reducing poverty. The most important investments
    in this category include education, child survival and health, rural
    development, and other measures that build human capacity and give the
    poor greater access to assets such as land and credit. The ultimate
    goal is to raise incomes among the poor and substantially improve
    living standards for a majority of the world's population.
        Addressing imminent global threats.--Stabilizing population,
    preserving the environment, and combating infectious diseases are top-
    priority objectives in this category. Development assistance also
    addresses other global issues such as migration, narcotics traffic, and
    terrorism by promoting economic opportunities and encouraging the
    development of stable, democratic governments.
        Assisting countries in transition.--Helping countries emerge from
    civil conflict, authoritarian rule, or command economies and develop
    into accountable democracies with market economies that stress
    equitable growth is perhaps the greatest foreign policy challenge of
    the coming decades. The transitions taking place in the former Soviet
    Union and Central and Eastern Europe should be given particularly high
    priority. Support to countries like Haiti, Bosnia, Mozambique, and El
    Salvador is critical to consolidate gains from peace accords.
        Supporting emergency relief and refugee programs.--Natural
    disasters, e.g. Mitch and the Colombian earthquake, and man made
    disasters, e.g. Sierra Leone, Congo, Sudan, continue to provoke great
    suffering. Relief and refugee assistance reflects the strong
    humanitarian values that have always been a part of U.S. international
    development cooperation. Relief should also help build local
    communities' capacity to better cope with future disasters. When
    disasters are caused by civil conflict and violence, relief should be
    accompanied by conflict-resolution efforts, then followed by aid that
    helps the country establish or restore democracy and rebuild its
    economy. Refugee assistance should be designed to reduce dependency
    and, when possible, facilitate the voluntary return of refugees and
    internally displaced persons to their home countries and communities.
    When repatriation is not a safe or viable option, refugee assistance
    should be directed toward other durable solutions, including
    resettlement in democratic and prosperous societies, including the U.S.
        A more clearly defined focus is needed to capitalize on America's
    comparative advantage and the special value to the development process.
    Effective government partnerships with NGOs and the private sector are
    a key element of our comparative advantage. Technical expertise in
    certain aspects especially financial, health and governance are
    critical aspects of development and there are countless others. We can
    sharpen this focus by concentrating resources in countries that have an
    obvious need for assistance and are good development partners--and thus
    where the potential for favorable impact is the highest.
                                   conclusion
        InterAction recommends that the final fiscal year 2000 budget
    reflect America's commitment to the current realities of increasing
    global interdependence. The natural and man-made disasters and economic
    turmoil of the last two years indicate that sufficient resources can
    help prevent the needless death of hundreds of thousands of people. In
    a time of unparalleled prosperity in the United States we should be
    offering greater assistance to help prevent conflict, and wise aid to
    the poor to prepare them better when conflict and natural catastrophes
    occur. We encourage this committee to provide bold leadership to
    adequately fund development assistance, debt restructuring,
    international organizations and programs, refugee and migration
    assistance, disaster assistance, food aid, and the environment. The
    data shows that these investments pay substantial dividends for the
    United States and the developing world.
        Thank you for the opportunity to testify and I wish you well as
    this process moves forward.
                                     ______

     Prepared Statement of Dr. Raymond E. Bye, Jr., Interim Vice President
                     for Research, Florida State University
        Mr. Chairman, thank you and the Members of the Subcommittee for
    this opportunity to present testimony. I would like to take a moment to
    acquaint you with Florida State University. Located in the state
    capitol of Tallahassee, we have been a university since 1950; prior to
    that, we had a long and proud history as a seminary, a college, and a
    women's college. While widely known for our athletics teams, we have a
    rapidly emerging reputation as one of the Nation's top public
    universities. Having been designated as a Carnegie Research I
    University several years ago, Florida State University currently
    exceeds $100 million per year in research expenditures. With no
    agricultural or medical school, few institutions can boast of that kind
    of success. We are strong in both the sciences and the arts. We have
    high quality students; we rank in the top 25 among U.S. colleges and
    universities in attracting National Merit Scholars. Our scientists and
    engineers do excellent research, and they work closely with industry to
    commercialize those results. Florida State ranks fourth this year among
    all U.S. universities in royalties collected from its patents and
    licenses, and first among individual public universities. In short,
    Florida State University is an exciting and rapidly changing
    institution.
        The Caribbean Law Institute (CLI), a joint project between Florida
    State University and the University of the West Indies, was formed to
    promote the reform and harmonization of commercial laws in the
    Commonwealth Caribbean. Previous projects have included company law,
    insurance law, insolvency, banking, arbitration, and consumer
    protection. As a result of CLI's activities, several Caribbean
    countries specifically Trinidad, Tobago, St. Vincent, Grenada, Antigua,
    and Dominica--have passed new legislation in a number of these areas.
        Mr. Chairman, let me briefly describe the collaborative approach
    our Institute employs when working in the Caribbean region. There is a
    close relationship developed among legislators, Attorneys General, and
    the CLI. This approach has been used in carrying out most of the law
    reform projects in the region. Participation of both the governments
    and practitioners in the region is considered vital to the projects,
    and their input is incorporated at all stages of the projects. Advisory
    committees are established for each area, legal studies conducted and
    discussed among members, and draft legislation is developed for
    discussion among legislators, legal staffs including the Attorneys
    General, and U.S. attorneys working within the CLI process. Close ties
    with these groups, along with strong relationships with local
    universities, has been a key to the success of CLI in the Caribbean
    region.
        For Caribbean countries to have ample opportunity to consider model
    bills that CLI has produced, continuing resources will be required to
    continue its work on the current legislative areas that include
    alternative dispute resolution, environmental law, and fair competition
    law. Let me say a word about each area in which work is currently being
    conducted under support from USAID and their Caribbean and Latin
    American Bureau. Work in each of these areas is progressing well.
    Alternative dispute resolution is a cost-effective and expedient
    alternative to full utilization of the legal system for resolving
    commercial disputes. In the area of environmental law, CLI has made a
    major contribution in the field through the publication of
    ``Environmental Laws of the Commonwealth Caribbean''. CLI has begun the
    evaluation of a number of international environmental conventions for
    the purpose and objectives of the conventions, the requirements for
    accession, and the implications for Caribbean states.
        In the next phase of Caribbean commercial law reform, CLI plans to
    focus on some of the following areas. Intellectual property in the
    international trade law context is an important area for U.S.-Caribbean
    commercial relations. In addition, trade in services and antidumping
    legislation are two additional areas that will be considered for future
    work. Finally, the area of legislation affecting consumers and their
    protections should be examined as well. CLI's work in these areas will
    continue the positive development of commercial activity in the region
    and will result in model bills for consideration of the CARICOM
    countries. Reform and harmonization in these areas will protect
    national and regional interests, as well as enhance the countries
    status as trading partners.
        Mr. Chairman, the success of the Caribbean Law Institute at Florida
    State University has led to a close and effective working relationship
    between CLI and the legislative and legal resources in each of the
    Caribbean nations. The advantage of such a working relationship between
    U.S. universities and Caribbean legislative and legal authorities is
    invaluable for present and future work. Our expanded area of commercial
    law reform, coupled with a long and successful track record in this
    region is one that we are justly proud. As a result, we are proposing
    that the three areas noted above intellectual property, trade in
    services, antidumping and consumer protection be developed and
    supported with fiscal year 2000 funds of $900,000 from the U.S. AID. It
    will build on successes in the past and will add to commercial legal
    stability and consistency throughout the Caribbean region.
        This is just one of many exciting activities going on at Florida
    State University that will make important contributions to solving some
    key problems and concerns our Nation faces today. Your support would be
    appreciated, and, again, thank you for an opportunity to present these
    views for your consideration.
                                     ______

         Prepared Statement of Cyrus M. Jollivette, Vice President for
                              Government Relations
        Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: I appreciate the
    opportunity to submit testimony on behalf of the University of Miami in
    Coral Gables, Florida concerning two important nationally recognized
    centers located on our campus, the Dante B. Fascell North-South Center
    and the School of Medicine's International Center for Health Research.
        Respectfully, Mr. Chairman, we seek $1.75 million for the Dante B.
    Fascell North-South Center and $1 million for the International Center
    for Health Research, both at the University of Miami. Please permit me
    to elaborate on these requests.
        The Dante B. Fascell North-South Center, permanently authorized in
    Public Law 102-138 is the only research, public policy studies, and
    information center of its type exclusively dedicated to finding
    practical solutions to problems and policy issues facing the Americas.
    In carrying out its congressional mandate to promote better relations
    among the United States and the nations of Canada, Latin America, and
    the Caribbean, the Center combines programs of public policy,
    cooperative study, research, and training. The Center's publications
    constitute a body of scholarly work that is at once timely, non-
    partisan, and policy-relevant. Publications are clear, accessible, and
    relevant for diverse audiences, including legislators, government
    officials, nongovernmental organizations, and the private sector. The
    Center's Western Hemisphere agenda benefits U.S. citizens by seeking to
    effect positive change and to address issues of major significance in
    the Americas.
        The Center responds to a hemispheric agenda that directly impacts
    the American people in the form of jobs and prosperity, drugs,
    migration, export opportunities, environmental quality, and the
    promotion of shared democratic values. Programs foster national and
    international linkages and partnerships through fellowships and
    collaborative efforts in research and training. The Center's priority
    research agenda focuses on vital inter-American issues such as trade
    and investment, migration, security, democratic governance, civil-
    military relations, corruption, institutional reform, civil society
    participation, and sustainable development.
        Findings of the Center's research reach scholars, policy makers,
    and opinion leaders in the United States and throughout the Hemisphere
    through a variety of publications including scholarly books and
    monographs, the Update and Issues report series, and North-South Agenda
    papers. This wide range of expertise has distinguished the Center as an
    invaluable national resource for identifying, analyzing, and
    understanding the myriad issues that have the potential to impact the
    United States' future prospects in a region of growing importance to
    our economic competitiveness and security.
        As the new spirit of cooperation in inter-American relations takes
    root and flourishes, it presents a unique opportunity for the United
    States to promote critical democratic ideals such as public
    accountability, transparency in government, and popular participation
    in the democratic process through active engagement of civil society.
    Miami, as host of technical trade negotiations during the first three
    years of the seven-year process for the Free Trade Area of the
    Americas, will play a major role in the newly emerging North-South
    order of close cooperation and partnership. Efforts at democratic
    consolidation combined with the negotiations for an FTAA will create
    the framework for inter-American relations for decades to come. The
    Dante B. Fascell North-South Center is uniquely positioned,
    geographically and academically, to create constructive input and play
    an important role in these processes. With a firm research base, an
    ever widening network of public and private partnerships in the United
    States and the rest of the Hemisphere, the Center is uniquely placed to
    facilitate the constructive development and evolution of cross-border
    relationships among the nations and peoples of the Americas as they
    work together to establish a new inter-American architecture. The
    Center's proven track record in facilitating dialogue among hemispheric
    governments, non-governmental organizations, and business interests
    will be a vital asset for the United States and its citizens in a new
    era of inter-American relations.
        I would especially like to commend this Subcommittee for its
    significant and invaluable efforts in providing continuing support got
    the ``Communicable Disease Initiative'' at USAID. Like the
    Subcommittee, we believe that it is imperative that the United States
    address the threat of infectious diseases by responding to the dramatic
    increase in, and resurgence of, communicable diseases affecting
    children and adults, assisting developing countries to strengthen their
    ability to protect and care for their people, and stopping the spread
    of these communicable diseases in developing countries. Emerging
    infections have been defined as those diseases whose incidence has
    increased in the past two decades, or threatens to increase in the near
    future. Re-emergence is the resurgence of known infections after
    declines in incidence. Emerging and re-emerging disease, once thought
    to be under control, have sharply decreased in recent years around the
    world. The reasons are multidimensional, including population growth,
    and increased mobility, environmental and climate changes,
    urbanization, the evolution of microbes, drug resistance organisms, and
    modern travel and trade. International commerce, travel, and migration
    within the Americas are creating new opportunities for disease re-
    emergence and greater spread, particularly when the movement of people
    and products is from developing to industrialized nations.
        The University of Miami International Center for Health Research is
    located in Miami, Florida, the major gateway city to Latin America and
    the Caribbean. The major goals of the Center are to investigate
    biological characteristics of causative microbial agents, to study the
    risk factors related to the spread of these infections, including
    interactions between nutritional status and susceptibility, as well as
    to develop innovative preventive strategies. An important role of the
    Center involved collaborative infectious disease control and prevention
    efforts to broaden expertise of indigenous Latin American and Caribbean
    health professionals, and link laboratory science and epidemiology with
    public health strategies and policy making processes. The Center's
    priority is to strengthen programs for the control of major infectious
    diseases, particularly malaria, dengue, TB and cholera. Emphasis is
    also placed on programs aimed at preventing the spread and reducing the
    impact of HIV infection and other sexually transmitted diseases. There
    is an urgent need to strengthen the existing research infrastructure
    and a close collaboration between US and Latin American and Caribbean
    scientists and policy makers. This enhanced research will lead to
    development of new effective strategies for control and prevention of
    these emerging and re-emerging diseases in the Americas.
        Infectious diseases are the leading cause of death worldwide,
    causing 17 million of the 52 million deaths each year. The U.S. has
    also been adversely impacted by emerging infectious diseases. This is
    evidenced by the fact that the death rate from infectious diseases in
    the U.S. has increased more than 50 percent since 1980 and in 1996,
    infectious diseases in the United States were ranked as the third
    leading cause of death. This trend will continue in the future since
    infectious microbes can easily travel across borders from other parts
    of the world and be introduced into the United States, threatening our
    national health and security. Controlling disease outbreaks and factors
    promoting them in other countries is important not only for
    humanitarian reasons, but also to prevent those diseases from entering
    the United States. Moreover, U.S. supported research in other countries
    provides American investigators with the opportunity and capacity to
    determine the causes, patterns of spread, factors that promote
    infectivity, and strategies for prevention and control of these
    diseases in the United States. Emerging infections are particularly
    serious in individuals with impaired immune systems, including
    malnourished children and adults. Even subclinical malnutrition or
    deficiency of individual vitamins and minerals that can only be
    detected by laboratory means, may predispose populations to infectious
    diseases. Poor nutritional status has been shown to influence all
    aspects of the humoral and cell mediated immune responses.
        The synergistic interaction of malnutrition and infection has long
    been recognized. Infectious illness influences nutritional status
    which, in turn, affects host susceptibility to infection. The
    interrelationships between infection, nutritional status and immune
    function are especially apparent in individuals infected with HIV
    virus, who exhibit impaired immune function and altered nutritional
    status. The international dimensions of emerging, and re-emerging
    infectious diseases are a continuous challenge that call for concerted
    efforts of the American countries. For example, in 1993 a new
    hantaviral illness, hantavirus pulmonary syndrome (HPS) was identified
    in the southwestern region of the United States (CDC, MMWR, 1993). This
    disease is characterized by a febrile prodrome in young healthy adults
    and disease progression can lead to respiratory failure. This virus has
    now been identified from cases around the world.
        Cholera, has also returned in epidemic proportions. In the United
    States, more cases occurred in 1992 than in any other year since
    cholera surveillance began in 1962. Since 1991, over 1 million cases
    and 9,000 deaths have occurred in Latin America, and the disease is
    showing a tendency to become endemic in areas in which basic sanitation
    is deficient and the educational level of the population is low.
    Although cholera initially reemerged in Peru, the disease has occurred
    throughout Latin America. The most profound problem associated with the
    reemergence of cholera has been the rapid emergence of multi-drug
    resistant strains. For example, Honduras witnessed its first case of
    cholera from the new pandemic in October, 1991. Within five years,
    antimicrobial-resistant V. cholera strains appeared in this country
    (Dubon, et. al. 1997). This may be due to the overuse of antibiotics in
    this area of the world or may indicate that drug-resistant cholera is
    becoming the dominant infecting form of the organism. International
    commerce may play a role in the redistribution of multi-drug resistant
    Vibrio cholera factors in one continent interact with global health by
    facilitating increased microbial traffic to distant regions. The re-
    emergence of dengue and dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) has been
    dramatic in the Americas. During the last ten years, five countries in
    South America have experienced major epidemics, for the first time in
    50 years. In the United States, the first indigenous transmission of
    dengue after 35 years of absence occurred in Texas in 1980. Between
    1986 and 1992, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
    diagnosed 157 cases of dengue. In 1994, 37 laboratory-confirmed cases
    were reported, doubling the annual average from the previous years
    (1987-1993). From 1977 to 1994, a total of 2,248 suspected cases of
    imported dengue fever were reported in the united States. Both mosquito
    vectors, Aedes aegypti and Aedes albopictus, are present in the
    southeastern part of the United States (8 states) permitting rapid
    transmission of the virus throughout this region. Most recently, a
    major outbreak of dengue fever and DHF was reported from Cuba. Nearly
    3,000 cases of confirmed dengue fever (including 12 fatalities) were
    reported during 1997 by the Cuban Ministry of health (Kouri et. al.,
    1998). Since asymptomatic and subclinical dengue cases frequently
    occur, the number of people infected with dengue virus was probably
    much higher. There are strong indications that dengue virus infections
    are currently increasing in several other Caribbean countries as well
    in several Central America. Thus, there is a compelling need to
    increase surveillance activities to track the movement of dengue fever
    and DHF throughout the Americas.
        Tuberculosis (TB) appears to be on the rebound. In the United
    States, TB incidence rose from 22,210 to 25,313 between 1985-1993, with
    60 percent of the excess cases attributed to disease in foreign-born
    individuals. From 1986 to 1993, 40 percent of foreign-born cases were
    from Latin America. Between 200,000 and 250,000 cases have been
    reported annually in the Americas since 1980. Eight countries face very
    severe problems, with incidence rates estimated at over 80 per 100,000:
    Bolivia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Paraguay,
    and Peru. There are four factors that seem to contribute to such a
    resurgence of TB: the HIV/AIDS epidemic, drug resistance, an increase
    in marginalized populations, and neglect of public health TB control
    programs. According tot he Pan Ameri can Health Organization (PAHO)
    estimates, 3.5 percent of TB cases in the Region were associated with
    HIV infection in 1990 and 15 percent will be linked to HIV infection in
    the year 2000. In several countries of the Americas, including the
    United States the emergence of multi-drug resistant TB (MDR-TB) has
    been also intimately related to the HIV epidemic. Thus, drug resistance
    surveillance can be an important program indicator for policy makers.
    Support of laboratories for international drug resistance monitoring
    needs to be considered.
        Malaria has had a resurgence in many tropical areas. The disease
    occurs in more than 90 countries worldwide and it is estimated that
    there are over 500 million clinical cases and 2.7 million malaria-
    caused deaths per year. A multitude of factors have contributed to
    reemergence of malaria, including: (1) insecticide resistance in the
    Anopheles mosquito (2) social instability resulting in movements of
    unexposed nonimmune individuals into areas where malaria is endemic and
    (3) the failure to develop an effective malaria vaccine. Compounding
    the problems of malaria's geographical expansion and of increasing
    morbidity and mortality are the emergence and rapid spread of
    antimalaria-drug resistance which necessitate the use of more expensive
    and sometimes toxic antimalaria drugs and longer treatment course. In
    various, parts of the United States, concomitance of competent vectors,
    suitable weather conditions, and malaria-infecting carriers entering
    the country have caused isolated cases or small outbreaks of
    ``autochthonous malaria''. In the past, these cases were limited to
    rural settings, but since 1990, indigenous malaria has been reported in
    urban areas as well. Plasmodium falciparum, the hemoparasite which
    causes the most severe form of disease, has become even more resistant
    to commonly used antimalarial drugs. Resistant falciparum malaria is
    now present throughout malaria endemic areas of South America.
        Antimicrobial drug resistance is perhaps one of the most alarming
    threats among the problems presented by emerging and re-emerging
    infections. The problem is well documented in the United States where
    increasing levels of drug resistance in both community-acquired (e.g.
    MDR Streptococus pneumonia) and nosocomial infections (resistant
    enterococci) have led infectious disease experts to declare the
    situation a crisis that could lead to a ``post-antibiotic'' era.
    Although less well-documented, the threat of antimicrobial resistance
    in the developing nations of the Western Hemisphere appears to outweigh
    that present in the United States and Canada. Most of the Latin
    American countries have conditions that facilitate antimicrobial drug
    resistance: uncontrolled sale of antibiotics, frequent self-medication,
    overcrowding and lack of adequate nosocomial infection control programs
    in many hospitals, along with almost nonexistent surveillance and
    reporting of antimicrobial resistance patterns.
        The HIV/AIDS pandemic continues to increase exponentially.--Reports
    from the World Health Organization (WHO), the Joint United Nations
    Programme on HIV/AID (UNAIDS), and the World Bank (WB) predict dramatic
    increases in worldwide HIV infections, particularly in developing
    nations. Dr. Piot, executive director of UNAIDS recently announced that
    ``We are now realizing that rates of HIV transmission have been grossly
    underestimated-particularly in sub-Saharan Africa''. The WHO has stated
    that ``the growing global HIV/AIDS crises is reversing decade of
    progress toward improving the quality of life in developing
    countries.'' It is now estimated that more than 30 million individuals
    are infected with HIV worldwide with as many as 16,000 new individuals
    becoming infected each during 1997. Nearly 90 percent of all people
    infected with HIV live in developing countries (Fox, 1998). Clearly,
    major research efforts need to be focused on the development of HIV
    prevention programs and more importantly, into the development of an
    effective vaccine.
        The magnitude and gravity of the current emerging and re-emerging
    infectious disease situation in the region of the Americas is of
    critical concern.--In order to develop an effective system for disease
    surveillance control and prevention, a strong and stable research
    infrastructure and close cooperation between scientists of United
    States and Latin America and Caribbean countries are essential.
    Enhanced research and raining efforts need to be established in the
    areas involving the most prevalent infectious diseases including TB,
    malaria, dengue, cholera, and HIV. The complex interaction between
    nutritional status and susceptibility, as well as disease progression,
    and control of these infections needs to be investigated along with
    basic research on all aspects of disease processes and public health
    strategies.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for permitting me to present these
    comments for the Subcommittee's consideration.
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of the American Society of Tropical Medicine and
                                    Hygiene
        Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, the American Society of
    Tropical Medicine and Hygiene (ASTMH) is pleased to have the
    opportunity to present its views on the fiscal year 2000 funding levels
    for programs that fall under the jurisdiction of this Subcommittee.
        The ASTMH, founded in 1903, is a professional society of
    approximately 3,500 researchers and practitioners who are dedicated to
    addressing the growing global threat of tropical infectious diseases.
    The collective expertise of our members is in the areas of basic
    molecular science, medicine, vector control, epidemiology, and public
    health. ASTMH is the principal voice for tropical medicine research
    within this country.
        ASTMH greatly appreciates the Committee's support last year for
    restoring the cuts proposed by the Administration for the Child
    Survival and Disease Programs Fund and providing an additional $50
    million in emergency funding for these activities to strengthen global
    surveillance and control of infectious diseases. We hope the Committee
    will continue support of the tropical infectious disease research and
    control activities of the U.S. Agency for International Development
    (USAID).
                          infectious disease programs
        As you know, the globalization and interdependence of world
    economies has resulted in an internationalization of health problems. A
    strong U.S. agenda relating to infectious and tropical diseases is
    critical at this time when the ease of travel and openness of trade
    increasingly exposes the world's population, including U.S. citizens,
    to new and re-emerging infectious disease agents. In 1993, more than 27
    million Americans traveled to the developing world risking infection
    from the many emerging and reemerging infectious and tropical diseases.
    In 1998, an outbreak of severe chicken influenza in Hong Kong publicly
    raised the specter of another influenza pandemic such as that
    experienced in 1918, killing several million persons. These diseases
    are also traveling into the U.S. Two years ago it was Cyclospora, a
    parasite which entered via raspberries and lettuce imported from
    Central America. And we are all now familiar with the re-emergence of
    tuberculosis and emergence of new diseases such as Hantavirus
    respiratory syndrome within the U.S.
        More than 30 new human pathogens have been recognized in the last
    25 years. It also is evident in our new world economy that, in addition
    to humanitarian reasons, investments that help ensure healthy
    populations in developing countries benefit the world's population as a
    whole.
        We must continue to be vigilant in our efforts to control and
    eradicate infectious diseases through prevention, treatment, and
    continued surveillance both here and abroad. The 1997 Institute of
    Medicine (IOM) report entitled, ``America's Vital Interest in Global
    Health,'' recommended that the nation should engage more actively in
    global health activities for a number of reasons, including the
    fulfillment of our humanitarian tradition, the protection of our
    people, the enhancement of our economy, and the advancement or our
    national interests.
        Globally, infectious diseases have an enormous impact on the lives
    of millions of people. They disrupt the lives of individuals, their
    families, and their communities and slow the development of sustainable
    economies and systems of government. In terms of lives lost each year
    to infectious diseases, these diseases are devastating. Each year,
    acute respiratory infections, such as pneumonia, kill 4.4 million
    people, about 4 million of them children. Diarrheal diseases, including
    cholera, typhoid and dysentery, spread chiefly by contaminated water or
    food, kill 3.1 million people. Tuberculosis kills almost 3.1 million
    adults annually, and malaria kills 2.7 million people every year.
        As we approach the 21st century, USAID must continue to partner
    with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Centers for Disease
    Control and Prevention (CDC), and the Department of Defense (DOD) in
    their efforts to combat malaria, diarrheal disease, and the myriad of
    other infections caused by viral, bacterial, fungal and parasitic
    disease agents.
                                    malaria
        Malaria is estimated to cause up to 500 million clinical cases and
    up to 2.7 million deaths each year, representing 4 percent to 5 percent
    of all fatalities. Malaria affects 2.4 billion people, or about 40
    percent of the world's population. Tragically, every 30 seconds a child
    somewhere dies of malaria. Malaria causes an enormous burden of disease
    in Africa, and is considered a primary cause of poverty. Malaria kills
    one child in twenty before the age of five in Africa.
        Malaria is reemerging in areas where it had been eradicated, such
    as Brazil, and spreading to new areas, such as Asia and Eastern Europe.
    One of the main reasons for its re-emergence is because the malaria
    parasite has developed resistance. Chloroquine is an inexpensive and
    effective treatment for malaria, however in Asia and increasing areas
    of Africa and South America the resistance to this and subsequent
    generations of anti-malarials is high.
        Recently the USAID participated in an effort to build a coordinated
    global strategy for malaria control, that involved major international
    entities including the World Health Organization (WHO), the National
    Institutes of Health (NIH), France's Institut Pasteur, and several
    private charities. As a result, meeting participants issued a ``call to
    action'' letter which states: ``The challenge is enormous. New drugs
    must be found to prevent and treat the disease, and vaccines need to be
    developed. This requires research at every level. . . . The urgent need
    is to put malaria on the scientific, media, and political agenda, and
    in particular to identify it as a priority for research, both in the
    developed North and in those areas of the South where the disease is
    endemic.''
        USAID development activities, including mosquito vector control
    strategies, improving the capacity of the public health infrastructure
    through training programs and technical assistance, and establishing
    communication linkages between developing countries and research
    institutions around the world via Internet, are making valuable
    contributions in countries where malaria continues to spread. Continued
    support for these activities is not only the right thing to do for
    humanitarian reasons, but is also the most effective prevention
    activity we can undertake to protect Americans at home and abroad from
    this re-emerging threat.
        Given the important role USAID has in the global response to
    malaria, ASTMH believes the Administration's proposal to maintain level
    funding for USAID's targeted programs to combat malaria and other
    infectious disease is woefully inadequate. ASTMH urges that these
    programs receive adequate increases so that on-going USAID activities
    are at least maintained, and USAID partnerships with international
    entities will continue to leverage private and pubic support for the
    range of activities dedicated to fighting global infectious disease.
                                    hiv/aids
        While we have witnessed some success in prevention and treatment
    protocols for HIV in the United States, the HIV/AIDS pandemic is
    spreading much faster around the globe. The Joint United Nations
    Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) reports that more than 6 million people
    became newly infected with HIV in 1998, 10 percent of whom were
    children, bringing cumulative infections since the beginning of the
    pandemic to nearly 50 million. This includes major increases in HIV
    infections in Africa, Asia, and Eastern Europe, especially among young
    people.
        The United States has a vital role to play, as the world's only
    superpower and leader in biomedical research, in supporting multiple
    approaches to HIV vaccine development. USAID budget documents report
    its involvement in over 300 major activities targeted to HIV/AIDS in 47
    countries around the world and expect to provide life saving services
    to over 50 million men and women over the next five years. As our
    liaison to developing nations around the globe, USAID has a critical
    role to play in helping these countries prepare for clinical trials and
    preventive vaccines, and sharing the successful products of U.S.
    efforts to control this tragic disease. For example, in many U.S.
    cities HIV transmission from mother to child has been virtually
    eliminated. By contrast, approximately 600,000 newborns in the
    developing world contracted the virus just last year due to lack of
    perinatal treatments. With adequate resources, USAID can help improve
    access to basic medical care and eliminate health disparities.
        ASTMH applauds the Administration's budget proposal of $127 million
    for the USAID HIV/AIDS account, representing an increase of $2 million
    over fiscal year 1999 levels. We request the Committee's support for
    this modest increase, and urge the Committee to exceed the
    Administration's request by providing the largest allocation possible
    for USAID HIV/AIDS activities.
                             child survival program
        ASTMH strongly supports USAID's Child Survival Program which has
    long been at the forefront of international efforts to alleviate
    morbidity and mortality among the world's most vulnerable populations--
    children under 5 years of age. This program funds immunizations, oral
    rehydration therapy, vitamin A supplementation, HIV/AIDS, river
    blindness, and other important health programs.
        Experts estimate that USAID's child survival programs have helped
    drop infant mortality rates in the developing world to their lowest
    levels ever, and since 1985, have saved 25 million children's lives.
    Deaths from measles have been cut in half, from more than two million
    to about 950,000 last year, and deaths from diarrhea are down by 30
    percent, from 4.5 million to about three million last year. In
    collaboration with the international community, including WHO and
    UNICEF, tremendous progress has been made. For example:
      --Since 1960, infant mortality has fallen from 130 to 60 per 1000
            live births, and child mortality has fallen from 180 to 80 per
            1000 live births.
      --Polio has been eradicated from the Western Hemisphere and there has
            been an 82 percent decline in reported polio cases from 1988
            and 1995.
      --In 1980, 76 countries reported less than one neonatal tetanus death
            per 1000 live births annually; by 1995 this had increased to
            122 nations.
      --Immunization programs have helped reduce the number of measles
            cases by 70 percent and the number of measles deaths by 83
            percent. Measles is targeted for elimination in the Americas by
            the year 2000.
                                   conclusion
        ASTMH greatly appreciates the Committee's past support for USAID
    initiatives. In a way, we are preaching to the choir, for you
    understand the need for greater resources to be directed to infectious
    and tropical disease programs.
        Many opportunities exist to expand our infectious disease programs
    to target new and emerging diseases. Infectious and tropical disease
    threats are major health problems world-wide, and the risk of global
    epidemic transmission increases directly with increased global
    communication and travel. As we enter the 21st century infectious
    diseases will continue to threaten the lives of millions of individuals
    around the globe and here at home, with great cost not only in lives
    but also in economic impact. We urge your continued support to ensure
    that this does not happen. ASTMH urges you to increase funding for
    crucial global infectious disease initiatives above the fiscal year
    1999 funding level of $50 million and to support USAID HIV/AIDS
    activities to the greatest extent possible, so that programs to
    predict, prevent, and control the emergence of these threats can be
    effectively carried out.
        Control of global infectious disease threats is not just a
    development issue, it is also a national security issue for the United
    States, one of concern to all our citizens. By controlling infectious
    diseases world wide we not only provide development assistance, but we
    also reduce the risk of spread of virulent organisms to our own
    population. Investments in global infectious disease control are
    clearly a win-win for the USA: by helping others, we protect ourselves.
        Thank you for your consideration of this request.
                                     ______

      Prepared Statement of Eugene T. Rossides, on Behalf of the American
        Hellenic Institute Public Affairs Committee, Inc., the Hellenic
     American National Council, the Hellenic American Women's Council, the
    Cyprus Federation of America, the Pan Laconian Federation of U.S.A. and
     Canada, the Pan Cretan Association of America, and the Pan Karpathian
                      Educational Progressive Association
        Chairman McConnell, Senator Leahy and Members of the Subcommittee:
    I am pleased to present testimony to the Subcommittee on behalf of the
    organizations listed above on the Administration's foreign aid
    proposals. The current crisis in Kosovo has focused the spotlight on
    Southeast Europe.
        As the result of the actions of the 104th Congress and the 105th
    Congress, military assistance and economic grant aid to Turkey are
    finally no longer part of the Administration's aid proposals. The
    decision of the Administration finally to eliminate aid for Turkey was
    due, I am convinced, in substantial part because of the role of the
    Congress.
        The American Hellenic Institute Public Affairs Committee (AHIPAC)
    believes that the elimination of aid for Turkey was fully justified in
    the interests of the United States. For many years AHIPAC has argued
    that U.S. military and economic support for Turkey has rendered our
    country an accessory to Turkey's aggression against Cyprus, massive
    ethnic cleansing and genocidal actions against its 20 percent Kurdish
    minority, and human rights abuses generally against its citizens,
    including widespread torture. AHIPAC is very pleased that with regard
    to aid policy this sad chapter in U.S. relations with Turkey has at
    long last come to an end.
                                     cyprus
        We support the amount of $15 million in humanitarian aid for
    Cyprus. This aid is an important symbol of U.S. support for Cyprus and
    of the U.S. commitment to achieving a comprehensive solution. We
    further believe that the Administration should follow the lead set by
    Congress and publicly call for the immediate demilitarization of
    Cyprus.
                     1999 greek american policy statements
        As the committee considers appropriations for overall U.S. policy
    in the region for the future, we hope you will take full advantage of
    the positive opportunities deriving from the close U.S. relationships
    with Greece and Cyprus. As the 1999 Greek American Policy Statements
    (Exhibit 1) make clear, Greece and Cyprus are vigorous and stable
    democracies. Their economies are rapidly modernizing. They are a source
    of regional political leadership, economic investment, and commercial
    expertise.
        Greece is the only regional state that is a member of both the
    European Union and NATO. Greece is the strategic and economic key for
    the U.S. in the Balkans and Eastern Mediterranean to bring peace,
    stability, economic progress and democracy to the region. U.S.
    Ambassador to Greece R. Nicholas Burns has stressed Greece's key role
    for U.S. interests in the region. We commend Greece for its forthright
    and generous contribution to humanitarian and refugee relief in Kosovo.
        Cyprus has established itself as a regional center of international
    business and finance and started substantive accession negotiations
    with the EU on November 10, 1998. By basing its policies in
    Southeastern Europe on close ties with Greece and Cyprus, the U.S.
    could materially advance its interests in regional stability, economic
    development, and increase in democratic institutions.
               turkey: the cause of many of the region's problems
        These positive opportunities will, however, remain unfulfilled if
    Congress allows the Administration to adhere to its present appeasement
    policies toward Turkey. In contrast to the positive roles played by
    Greece and Cyprus, Turkey plays a negative role and is the prime cause
    of many of the region's problems.
        The kidnapping of the Kurdish leader Abdullah Ocalan put Turkey's
    human rights record on the front page. More profoundly, his subsequent
    treatment, the manner of his trial, and the demand for the death
    penalty have illuminated the disproportionate and anti-democratic
    influence over domestic and foreign policy exercised by the Turkish
    military. As set forth in the Turkish constitution, the Turkish
    military controls Turkish foreign and national security policy and
    asserts decisive influence in domestic policy.
        As with all military dictatorships from Chile in the 1970s to Burma
    today, military control leads to violations of human rights and the
    rule of law. Turkey has continued and extended its illegal territorial
    claims against sovereign Greek territory, prompted new and unacceptable
    conditions for negotiations about Cyprus, continued its harassment of
    the Ecumenical Patriarchate, challenged international maritime law over
    shipping in the Bosphoros, and further stained its already notorious
    human rights record against pro-democratic forces and ethnic and
    religious minorities inside Turkey. Turkey is also a government wracked
    with corruption and a major illegal drug producing and drug trafficking
    country. Turkey's violations of international law eclipse those of Iraq
    under Saddam Hussein.
                            the course for congress
        The immediate reaction by Congress with regard to Turkey should be
    to mandate an immediate halt to all arms sales and transfers to Turkey.
    The Administration has under active consideration the sale of advanced
    attack helicopters that will be used in Turkey's war of terror against
    its Kurdish minority. In addition to an arms ban, the Congress should
    eliminate any trade preferences or other benefits for Turkey, freeze
    any loan programs for Turkey and instruct U.S. representatives in
    multinational agencies to vote against any aid or loans for Turkey. I
    urge the members of this committee to take the lead in such efforts and
    to call for hearings on a critical review of U.S.-Turkey relations.
          state department's country report on human rights in turkey
        Turkey's lawlessness has been on record for many years. The State
    Department's 1997 Human Rights report stated: ``Despite the
    government's stated commitment to respect human rights, serious human
    rights abuses continued.'' The 1998 report, released February 26, 1999
    notes no improvement. Using almost identical language, it states:
        ``Despite Prime Minister Yilmaz's stated commitment that human
    rights would be his government's highest priority in 1998, serious
    human rights abuses continued. . . . Extrajudicial killings, including
    deaths in detention from the excessive use of force, `mystery
    killings,' and disappearances continued. Torture remained widespread.
    Police and Jandarma antiterror personnel often abused detainees and
    employed torture during incommunicado detention and interrogation.''
        Turkey's national torture policy has been a matter of public record
    for many years. In 1990 the distinguished law journal The Record of the
    Bar of the City of New York devoted a 125 page article to the subject
    of ``Torture in Turkey'' (45 Record pp. 6-131, 1990). A forty page
    follow-up article 4 years later found no improvement.
        This horrific account of Turkey's oppression of its own citizens
    pains us all the more deeply as we have no quarrel with the Turkish
    people. We salute the brave Turkish citizens struggling for human
    rights and the rule of law. Our dispute is not with the Turkish people,
    but with the forces in the Turkish military and Turkish government that
    deny its own people the basic norms of civilization that we take for
    granted in the U.S.
          the dark side of the united states relationship with turkey
        During the Cold War, U.S. relations with Turkey went largely
    unexamined. Today the dynamics have changed. The Cold War has been over
    for 9 years. The Abdullah Ocalan case has brought to the front pages
    one of the most underreported stories in modern public policy, namely
    the dark side of the U.S. relationship with Turkey involving Turkey's
    horrendous human rights record and genocidal war against the Kurds in
    Turkish Kurdistan.
        We now need to confront the grisly reality that in their 15-year-
    long war against its Kurdish minority, the Turkish military forces have
    killed close to 30,000 Kurds, death squads have assassinated hundreds
    of Kurdish leaders, scorched earth military campaigns have destroyed
    over 3,000 Kurdish villages removing by force over 2,500,000 Kurds from
    their homes. And the Turks have done so in large part using U.S.
    supplied arms such as attack helicopters and armored personnel
    carriers. The accuracy of these facts is attested by objective
    observers such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and
    others. These horrors far exceed anything that has happened in Kosovo.
    This is a matter of intense national shame to American values and
    principles.
        Mr. Chairman, this should trouble all of our consciences. Our
    nation's involvement in these terrible acts is an affront to the
    fundamental issues of our time: freedom, democracy, decency, and human
    rights, the values we fought for in World War II and against Soviet
    communism. The fact that the Administration is turning its back on
    these values is a scandal far exceeding those with which we in
    Washington and throughout the Nation have been so narrowly concerned
    over the past year. Despite all their impressive rhetoric of commitment
    to democracy, in their approach to Turkey, the State and Defense
    Departments are in fact siding with aggression, tyranny, crimes against
    humanity, ethnic cleansing and genocide.
      yugoslavia and kosovo and the united states double standard toward
                              turkey and the kurds
        The Kosovo crisis further illustrates the contradictions inherent
    in U.S. policy toward Turkey. We share the universal concern about the
    unfolding humanitarian disaster, condemn the brutality of Milosevic's
    actions, and support the legitimate aims for autonomy for the Albanian
    minority in Serbia.
        However, we believe the reasons given for the intervention against
    Serbia raise wider issues. It is only right that the arguments used
    regarding Yugoslavia should apply elsewhere in the region. With regard
    to Turkey they apply precisely. Practically everything said by the
    President and other senior Administration officials (and those by NATO
    officials and European government officials) regarding Yugoslavia and
    its Albanian minority applies equally to Turkey and its Kurdish
    minority. Change Yugoslavia to Turkey and Albania to Kurds in the
    speeches and statements and they remain accurate.
        If, as NATO states, Milosevic is using scorched earth tactics in
    Kosovo, he has copied them from Turkey's approach against the Kurds.
    Turkey has followed a brutal policy of ethnic cleansing and their
    actions meet the criteria for ``crimes against humanity'' and
    ``genocide.'' They have employed a policy of dispersal to reduce the
    percentage of Kurds in Southeast Turkey, which is part of Kurdistan as
    delineated by President Woodrow Wilson and set forth in the 1920 Treaty
    of Sevres.
        To support autonomy for the Albanian minority in Serbia, while
    abetting the Turkish military's ethnic cleansing and horrendous human
    rights violations of the Kurdish minority in Turkish Kurdistan, is a
    double standard. It is not in the interests of the U.S.
        The U.S. should state unequivocally that the U.S. supports autonomy
    for the Kurdish people in Turkish Kurdistan and that in order to
    achieve that aim the U.S. is prepared to apply the same political and
    economic pressure on the Turkish military as it has on Serbia. NATO
    should do the same, particularly since Turkey is a member of NATO.
        We do not call for military action against Turkey but believe that
    appropriate action, namely economic sanctions and suspension from NATO,
    should be implemented until Turkey is in compliance with U.S. laws, the
    UN Charter, the North Atlantic Treaty and customary international law.
       the united states, nato, yugoslavia, turkey, and cyprus: a double
                                    standard
        In making the case for action against Serbia, President Clinton and
    others have cited the need to oppose aggression. Once again NATO member
    Turkey is guilty on that count.
        Turkey's invasion of Cyprus and occupation of 37.3 percent of
    Cyprus in 1974 is external aggression and a violation of the U.N.
    Charter preamble and Article 2 (4), and the North Atlantic Treaty
    preamble and Article 1, and customary international law. Further,
    Turkey violated U.S. laws because it illegally used U.S. supplied arms
    and equipment in its invasion of Cyprus. This clear, unambiguous
    violation of international law eclipses in its implications for
    international order the internal action taken by Serbia in Kosovo.
        Ever since 1974, the U.S. and NATO have tolerated and appeased the
    Turkish military's ethnic cleansing and crimes against the Greek
    Cypriots in Cyprus.
        The actions of the U.S. and NATO regarding Cyprus from 1974 to date
    are a stain on the honor of both, particularly because of the U.S.
    accessory role in Turkey's 1974 invasion of Cyprus which the State
    Department has been attempting to cover-up ever since.
        The parallel between Turkey's invasion and occupation of Cyprus and
    Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait is clear. The U.S. should be
    as forceful in ridding Cyprus of its aggressor, Turkey, as it was in
    Kuwait. At a minimum, NATO should suspend Turkey from the alliance
    until Turkey is in compliance with the North Atlantic Treaty and the
    U.N. Charter.
        The issues involved are discussed at greater length in the 1999
    Greek American Policy Statements. Other exhibits attached are:
        Exhibit 2.--Op-ed page article in the Los Angeles Times, (Nov. 19,
    1998) by John Tirman, Executive Director, Winston Foundation for World
    Peace, which discusses ``the savage treatment of the Kurdish population
    in Turkey for 70 years.''
        Exhibit 3.--Column in the Cleveland Plain Dealer (Feb. 22, 1999,
    page 9-b) by its foreign affairs correspondent, Elizabeth Sullivan,
    which discusses Turkey's ``brutality and repression against the Kurds''
    and compares Yugoslavia's crackdown on an armed Albanian insurgency in
    its province of Kosovo and Turkey's armed repression of a Kurdish
    insurgency and differing U.S. positions.
        This brings home the fact that there is no difference in principle
    between the Kurdish struggle for autonomy and those of other peoples,
    such as the Kosovo Albanians whose struggle the U.S. supports today,
    including negotiations for autonomy on their behalf with the Yugoslav
    government. As such, the U.S. should stop referring to those who
    articulate these legitimate aspirations on behalf of the Kurdish
    peoples as terrorists. To fight against oppression is not terrorism.
        Exhibit 4.--My letter to Chairman Sonny Callahan, House
    Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, of April 28, 1998
    regarding ``The record of Turkey's unreliability as an ally.''
          the two prime determinants of united states policy on turkey
        Mr. Chairman, the Administration's policies toward Turkey remain
    deeply flawed. AHIPAC urges Congress to demand a critical review of
    U.S. policy toward Turkey. For this to be successful it will be
    necessary to focus on the two prime determinants of the policy.
                      policies driven by career officials
        While the President, Secretary of State and Secretary of Defense
    have the final responsibility for this policy, they do not drive it. It
    is driven by a handful of career foreign service officers in State
    together with their counterparts in the Defense Department and on the
    National Security Council. Over the years these officials have shaped
    U.S. policy toward Turkey with the end effect of violating U.S. laws
    and making our country a direct accessory in Turkey's destabilizing
    role in the region.
        These officials, past and present, assert that the U.S. is acting
    as an ``honest broker'' in the region. The truth is otherwise. Laurence
    Stern, the distinguished foreign affairs correspondent and foreign news
    editor for the Washington Post, punctured that myth in his book The
    Wrong Horse (1977, page 7) when he wrote that:
        ``One of the most important keys to an understanding of the Cyprus
    muddle is the realization that the United States, far from being a
    disinterested broker to the disputes of the past, was a deeply involved
    participant.''
                           state department cover-up
        The lack of political will and a strong pro-Turkish tilt in the
    State Department and other agencies have corrupted this vital area of
    U.S. foreign policy. Instead of open, democratic government we have
    witnessed a cover-up of the State Department's accessory role in
    Turkey's 1974 invasion of Cyprus and its pro-Turkish tilt. It has led
    to an Orwellian denial that the Cyprus problem is one of aggression and
    occupation by Turkey with the active participation of the U.S through
    the State Department. It has led to a failure to act on the U.S.' clear
    moral responsibility to redress the problem. It has caused our
    government to abandon the rule of law regarding Turkey.
        The State Department's cover-up and other failures have seriously
    damaged U.S. national interests and cost the U.S. treasury billions of
    dollars in wasted military and economic aid to Turkey.
                turkey's paid united states agents of influence
        The second determinant of this pro-Turkish policy is the horde of
    Turkey's paid U.S. ``agents of influence'' registered with the
    Department of Justice under the Foreign Agents Registration Act.
    Alongside the role of career officials, the Congress should also
    investigate the role played by these agents. Turkey has spent an
    average of $3-$4 million annually on several lobbying firms for over a
    decade. This practice apparently enjoys constitutional protection under
    the First Amendment.
        Nonetheless, the impression given is that the foreign policy of
    this country is for sale to the highest bidder. For citizens committed
    to a foreign policy based on American interests and American values, it
    is highly disquieting that foreign money and that former high officials
    on the payroll of a foreign government should exert an influence of
    this nature on American policy making. The U.S. lobbyists for Turkey
    also bear responsibility as accomplices to Turkey's crimes. Congress
    should demand an accounting.
             the united states, cyprus, turkey and the rule of law
        Mr. Chairman, the rule of law, not advanced weaponry, is a core
    principle of American diplomacy and the surest instrument for advancing
    American interests in the world. All too often U.S. policies have
    failed to apply the rule of law in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean
    against persistent violations by Turkey. Despite these violations, the
    U.S. has given assistance and supplied arms to Turkey far beyond its
    legitimate defense needs and inconsistent with its role in NATO. This
    appeasement and application of a double standard vis-a-vis Turkey has
    damaged U.S. interests. We call upon the Administration and all U.S.
    government agencies, particularly the State Department, to correct
    these failures and to apply the rule of law rigorously in all contacts
    with Turkey.
        Nowhere is the rule of law more neglected than with regard to
    Cyprus where the coddling and appeasement of Turkey by the
    Administration are the main obstacles to a settlement of the Cyprus
    problem. The lack of political will is in the State and Defense
    Departments.
        A comprehensive settlement is attainable if the Congress and the
    Executive Branch were to respond to Turkey's aggression in the same
    manner as President Eisenhower responded to aggression when he
    condemned and reversed the invasion of Egypt by Britain, France, and
    Israel in October 1956. On that occasion he said:
        ``There can be no peace without law. And there can be no law if we
    were to invoke one code of conduct for those who oppose us and another
    for our friends.''
        The following are several examples of the United States, led by the
    State Department, not applying the rule of law to Turkey, all to the
    detriment of U.S. interests:
        (1) the failure to apply U.S. and international law to Turkey's
    ethnic cleansing and genocidal war against its 20 percent Kurdish
    minority;
        (2) the failure to apply U.S. law and international law to Turkey's
    several invasions of northern Iraq, for military actions against Kurds
    in northern Iraq, including massive invasions with up to 35,000 troops;
        (3) the failure to apply U.S. and international law to Turkey's
    periodic bombing of Kurds in Iraq;
        (4) the failure to apply U.S. and international law to Turkey's
    continuing occupation of 37.3 percent of Cyprus with 35,000 troops;
        (5) the failure to apply international law to the Aegean Imia
    islets issue;
        (6) the failure to apply the Iran-Iraq Sanctions Act to Turkey's
    deals with Iran and Libya;
        (7) the failure to apply U.S. and international law to Turkey's
    violations of religious freedom against Christians and Jews in Turkey,
    including the illegal closing of the Halki Patriarchal School of
    Theology;
        (8) the failure to apply international law to Turkey's illegal
    embargo on Armenia;
        (9) the failure to apply the Geneva Convention of 1949 to Turkey's
    80,000 illegal settlers;
        (10) the failure to apply the terms of the NATO Treaty to Turkey
    for its invasion of Cyprus; and
        (11) the failure to condemn Turkey's violation of the UN Charter by
    Turkey's threats of war against Greece in the Aegean regarding Greece's
    internationally recognized right to extend its territorial waters from
    6 to 12 miles.
                                nato and cyprus
        We have long called for a NATO force on Cyprus under U.N. auspices
    and acting in full respect of Cyprus' sovereignty as a component of a
    settlement of the Cyprus problem. However, under pressure from the U.S.
    government, NATO has applied a similar double standard to Turkey on the
    rule of law.
        While NATO is taking action to promote Albanian autonomy in the
    Serbian province of Kosovo, it is conspicuously silent on the
    aspirations for autonomy of the Kurds. This is a double standard, pure
    and simple.
        NATO's toleration of Turkey's aggression against Cyprus in
    violation of its own Treaty and the UN Charter is a stain on NATO's
    record and honor. NATO should call for the immediate removal of
    Turkey's illegal occupation forces and settlers from Cyprus and the
    demilitarization of Cyprus coupled with a military force to augment the
    UN peacekeeping force. If Turkey refuses to cooperate, NATO should
    consider appropriate action to bring Turkey into compliance.
        To conclude, Mr. Chairman, we support the following legislative
    initiatives:
        1. We support the amount of $15 million in humanitarian aid for
    Cyprus. We urge the Administration to follow Congress' lead and call
    publicly for the immediate demilitarization of Cyprus. We call upon the
    Administration to give full support for Cyprus' accession negotiations
    with the European Union and to reject any attempt by Turkey to delay or
    interfere with these. During 1998 we deplored the Clinton
    Administration's heavy-handed pressure on the government of Cyprus'
    efforts to acquire defensive weaponry. The State Department
    manufactured the issue 2 years ago and intimidated Cyprus into altering
    the contract. We support military aid for Cyprus to purchase the U.S.
    patriot anti-missile system.
        2. Although military aid to Greece was also halted by the
    Administration, we support military aid for Greece as long as Turkey
    keeps its illegal 35,000 man army of occupation and its 80,000 illegal
    colonists/settlers in the occupied territory of Cyprus, and maintains
    its 125,000 man Army of the Aegean aimed at Greece's Aegean islands. A
    clear message to Turkey would be sent if Congress appropriated some
    military aid for Greece. We condemn Turkey's threats on Greece's
    national sovereignty over the islets of Imia in the Aegean and Turkey's
    threats of war against Greece in the Aegean regarding Greece's
    internationally recognized right to extend its territorial waters from
    6 to 12 miles. These threats are in violation of the U.N. Charter
    Preamble and Article 2 (4) and the NATO Treaty Preamble and Article 1.
        3. We oppose any sale or transfers of U.S. weapons to Turkey as
    contrary to the best interests of the U.S.
        4. We believe that the Congress should eliminate any trade
    preferences and any other benefits for Turkey, freeze any loan programs
    for Turkey, instruct U.S. representatives in multinational agencies to
    vote against any aid or loans for Turkey, and should consider economic
    sanctions against Turkey.
        5. The Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees
    should hold hearings on a critical review of U.S.-Turkey relations.
        Turkey is the main security threat to U.S. interests and to Greece
    and Cyprus in the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean. A close U.S.
    relationship with Greece and Cyprus represents the best counter to this
    threat to U.S. interests. For the White House and career officials in
    the State Department and Defense Department to deny this is to deny
    reality.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
                                   EXHIBIT 1
                     1999 Greek American Policy Statements
        Prepared by the American Hellenic Institute (AHI) and approved by
    the Order of AHEPA and its Cyprus and Hellenic Affairs Committee, the
    Hellenic American National Council (HANC), the Hellenic American
    Women's Council (HAWC) and the Cyprus Federation of America
                            overview and main themes
        1. The Southeast European and Eastern Mediterranean region is of
    strategic importance to the United States. For too long U.S.
    administrations have failed to follow sensible or realistic policies
    aimed at addressing the region's long-standing problems. Greece and
    Cyprus offer an opportunity to break away from this negative pattern of
    events and make a decisive advance for U.S. national interests in the
    region.
        2. Greece and Cyprus are vigorous and stable democracies. Their
    economies are rapidly modernizing. They are a source of regional
    political leadership, economic investment, and commercial expertise.
    Greece is the only regional state that is a member of both the European
    Union and NATO. Cyprus has established itself as a regional center of
    international business and finance and started substantive accession
    negotiations with the EU on November 10, 1998. By basing its policies
    in Southeastern Europe on close ties with Greece and Cyprus, the U.S.
    could materially advance its vital interest in regional stability,
    economic development, and increase in democratic institutions.
        3. By contrast, Turkey has played a negative role and is the prime
    cause of many of the region's problems. This is in large part because
    of the disproportionate and anti-democratic influence of the Turkish
    military over Turkish governance as set forth in the Turkish
    constitution. Turkey has continued and extended its illegal territorial
    claims against sovereign Greek territory, prompted new and unacceptable
    conditions for negotiations about Cyprus, continued its harassment of
    the Ecumenical Patriarchate, challenged international maritime law over
    shipping in the Bosphoros, and further stained its already notorious
    human rights record against pro-democratic forces and ethnic and
    religious minorities inside Turkey.
        4. The U.S. should recognize and state that the main impediment to
    progress on the region's problems lies with Turkey and its military-
    controlled government. Until this happens, the U.S. interests in terms
    of regional stability, advancement of democratic values and commercial
    opportunity will languish. We therefore call upon the Administration
    and the Congress to reinforce the positive developments already under
    way in Greece and Cyprus and to conduct a critical review of its
    approach to Turkey.
        5. The rule of law is a core principle of American diplomacy and
    the surest instrument for advancing American interests in the world.
    All too often U.S. policies have failed to apply the rule of law in the
    Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean against persistent violations by
    Turkey. Despite these violations, the U.S. has given assistance and
    supplied arms to Turkey far beyond its legitimate defense needs. This
    appeasement and application of a double standard to Turkey has damaged
    U.S. interests. We call upon the Administration and all U.S. government
    agencies, particularly the State Department, to correct these failures
    and to apply the rule of law rigorously in all contacts with Turkey.
        6. As the vigorous NATO engagement in the Balkans shows, NATO has
    the potential to act as a catalyst for the region's problems. We have
    long called for a NATO force on Cyprus under U.N. auspices and acting
    in full respect of Cyprus' sovereignty as a component of a settlement
    of the Cyprus problem. However, under pressure from the U.S.
    Government, NATO has applied a similar double standard to Turkey on the
    rule of law. NATO's toleration of Turkey's aggression against Cyprus in
    violation of its own Treaty and the UN Charter is a stain on NATO's
    record and honor. NATO should call for the immediate removal of
    Turkey's illegal occupation forces and settlers from Cyprus and the
    demilitarization of Cyprus coupled with a military force to augment the
    UN peacekeeping force. If Turkey refuses to cooperate, NATO should
    consider appropriate action to bring Turkey into compliance.
                                   discussion
    Greece
        Greece is the key for the U.S. and EU to stability and peace in the
    Eastern Mediterranean and the Balkans. It is the only state that is a
    member both of the EU and NATO. While holding clearly articulated
    positions on regional issues affecting its vital national interests,
    Greece has committed itself to the rule of law and to the principles of
    non-aggression in seeking solutions.
        We call upon the United States to take advantage of this positive
    reality by developing a ``special relationship'' with Greece
    commensurate with the latter's potential to advance U.S. interests. We
    call upon the U.S. to recognize the integrity of Greek sovereign
    territory and to uphold international law, especially in relation to
    the Aegean. We call upon the U.S. to repudiate any unilateral
    challenges to Greek sovereign territory.
    Cyprus
        The opening of substantive EU accession negotiations on November
    10, 1998 presents a favorable opportunity to make progress on the
    Cyprus problem, the continuation of which is an affront to
    international law and to U.S. values, as well as a threat to regional
    stability. We call upon the United States to intensify efforts to reach
    a fair settlement based on democratic principles that respect the
    rights of all Cypriots.
    Turkey
        Resolution of the issues relating to the Aegean and Cyprus require
    a reciprocal attitude of statesmanship on the part of Turkey. To date,
    this has been missing. In May 1998 Ambassador Richard Holbrooke
    publicly faulted Turkey for its continuing intransigence on the Cyprus
    problem. Furthermore, Turkey has engaged in a series of destabilizing
    actions toward Greece and Cyprus and continues to violate international
    law. Its military-controlled government and constitution inhibit
    Turkey's evolution as a modern, democratic state.
        For too long the United States to its detriment has followed a
    counter-productive approach to Turkey. It has overlooked Turkey's
    violations of the norms of international behavior and thereby
    encouraged new patterns of Turkish belligerence and intimidation. By
    its past military and economic assistance to Turkey the U.S. has
    distorted the balance of power in the region and has acted as an
    accessory in these and other acts by Turkey against the rule of law in
    national and international affairs.
        The favorable circumstances in Greece and Cyprus provide an
    opportunity to reverse this approach. The U.S. has the power and duty
    to bring about a change in Turkey's attitudes. We call upon the
    Administration to undertake a critical review of United States-Turkey
    relations.
        Pending the outcome of this review we call upon the Administration
    to halt all arms sales and transfers to Turkey, forbid the
    participation by U.S. contractors in any Turkish military procurement
    bidding processes, to freeze any loan programs for Turkey, and to
    instruct its representatives in multinational agencies to vote against
    any aid for Turkey.
                             legislative priorities
        We call upon the Congress:
        1. To pass legislation requiring the Administration to conduct a
    critical review of U.S. policy toward Turkey;
        2. To hold hearings into actions by the State Department and other
    government agencies that contravene U.S. or international law with
    regard to Cyprus, Greece and Turkey;
        3. To pass legislation similar to H. Con. Res. 188 introduced in
    the House on November 7, 1997 requiring the Administration to apply
    international law by recognizing the islands and islets of the Aegean
    described or delimited by the Treaty of Lausanne and successor treaties
    and agreements as sovereign Greek territory.
        4. To pass legislation similar to HR 1361, the Turkish Human Rights
    Act, introduced in the House on April 17, 1997 by Representatives
    Robert Andrews (D-NJ) and John Porter (R-IL) to prohibit military and
    economic aid to Turkey unless the Secretary of State determines that
    Turkey permits international human rights monitoring organizations to
    report on the human rights situation in Turkey; has ceased to deny
    human rights to the Kurdish people; has taken action to demilitarize
    Cyprus and provide support for democracy there; has ceased to blockade
    U.S. and international assistance to Armenia; and has ceased its
    restrictions on religious freedom.
        5. To pass legislation providing for economic and trade sanctions
    against Turkey including the removal of any current trade benefits and
    MFN status until Turkey has removed all its armed forces from Cyprus
    including its illegal occupation forces; removed all Turkish settlers
    from Cyprus; has returned the occupied areas of Morphou and Famagusta
    to the government of Cyprus under UN auspices for the immediate
    resettlement of displaced persons; restored churches in the occupied
    areas illegally converted to mosques in violation of the Geneva
    Convention of 1949; and agreed to a constitution for Cyprus based on
    the normal and basic principle of majority rule.
        6. To remain seized of the provisions of S. 1067 ``The Code of
    Conduct on Arms Transfers Act'' and H.R. 1757 ``The European Security
    Act'' as they apply to arms transfers to Turkey and to ensure that no
    arms transfers take place so long as Turkey continues to violate U.S.
    and international law, the UN Charter, the NATO Treaty, the 1949 Geneva
    Convention and relevant treaties and agreements with specific reference
    to Greece and Cyprus.
        7. To remain seized of the provisions of Section 2804 of the 1999
    Appropriations bill passed on October 22, 1998 and signed into law
    calling upon the United States to use its influence with the government
    of Turkey to guarantee the security of the Ecumenical Patriarchate in
    Istanbul and to reopen the Halki Theological School and to ensure that
    the actions called for in the new law are put into effect.
                                 list of issues
        The issues facing the U.S. of particular concern to Greek Americans
    are:
        Aegean; Cyprus; Greece; Ecumenical Patriarchate and the Halki
    Patriarchal School of Theology; Turkey; Arms sales and transfers to
    Turkey.
        Other issues including: Albania, Armenia, Former Yugoslav Republic
    of Macedonia (FYROM), Kurds, and NATO.
                               policy statements
        The policies set forth herein are based in each case on the
    question of what is in the best interests of the United States.
    Aegean
        1. We support the adherence to internationally recognized law,
    treaties and agreements regarding the territorial integrity and
    sovereign rights of a state, including the United Nations Charter and
    the NATO Treaty. Regarding the Aegean, we specifically refer to the
    Lausanne Treaty of 1923, the Italy-Turkish Convention of January 4,
    1932, the Italy-Turkish Protocol of December 28, 1932, the 1947 Paris
    Peace Treaty, under which the Dodecanese Islands and adjacent islets
    were ceded by Italy to Greece, and the Law of the Sea Convention.
        2. We call upon the U.S. Government to recognize and uphold the
    aforementioned treaties and agreements and to repudiate any challenge
    to them, specifically by Turkey.
        3. We call upon the U.S. Government to recognize and state publicly
    that the islets of Imia are Greek sovereign territory in accordance
    with the 1947 Paris Peace Treaty under which the Dodecanese Islands and
    adjacent islets were ceded by Italy to Greece, the 1932 Italy-Turkey
    Convention of January 4, 1932, the Italy-Turkey Protocol of December
    28, 1932 in which Imia is specifically named as belonging to Italy, the
    Lausanne Treaty of 1923, and international law.
        On February 15, 1996 the European Parliament passed a resolution
    (342 to 21 with 11 abstentions) stating the islets of Imia belong to
    Greece and condemned Turkey's aggressive threats to established
    sovereignty in the Aegean. In a February 1, 1996 statement to Greece,
    Italy supported the Greek legal position regarding the 1932 Italy-
    Turkey Protocol. Also, on February 7, 1996 France stated that it
    unequivocally recognized Greece's sovereignty over the Imia islets.
        4. We call on Congress to pass legislation similar to H. Con. Res
    188, a concurrent resolution introduced in the House on November 7,
    1997 with twenty-two co-sponsors which stated ``That it is the sense of
    the Congress that the islets of Imia in the Aegean sea are sovereign
    territory of Greece under international law.''
        5. In Madrid on July 8, 1997, Turkey signed an Agreement with
    Greece under the auspices of Secretary of State Madeleine Albright,
    abjuring the use of force to settle problems between the two countries.
    Turkey also undertook to respect international law. On December 3,
    1997, in Brussels, Turkey and Greece reached another agreement in the
    NATO framework to respect each other's airspace.
        These agreements have been repeatedly violated by Turkey, whether
    in the form of illegal military overflights, through new territorial
    claims, or other actions. We call upon the U.S. to insist that Turkey
    adheres to these agreements, specifically by desisting from territorial
    claims in the Aegean and from violating Greek airspace. We condemn
    Turkey for its numerous and continuous threats on the territorial
    integrity of Greece, including the January 1998 claim to Kalogeri, the
    January 30-31 1996 incident over the islets of Imia in the Aegean (see
    above) and the May 31, 1996 Turkish dispute of Greek sovereignty over
    the island of Gavdos (see below).
        6. We condemn Turkey's threats of war against Greece in the Aegean
    regarding Greece's internationally recognized right to extend its
    territorial waters from 6 to 12 miles, and note that Turkey itself has
    exercised this right by extending its territorial waters from 6 to 12
    miles in the Mediterranean Sea and Black Sea despite the fact that it
    is not a signatory of the Law of the Sea Convention. The United States
    has also extended its territorial waters to 12 miles. The Turkish Grand
    National Assembly passed a resolution on June 8, 1995, authorizing the
    Turkish government to use force if Greece extends its territorial
    waters to 12 miles.
        7. We note that Turkish threats of war and the June 8, 1995 Turkish
    National Assembly resolution are violations of Turkey's undertakings in
    the Madrid Agreement of July 8, 1997, the United Nations Charter,
    article 2 paragraph 4, and the NATO Treaty preamble and article 1. The
    U.N. Charter, article 2 (4) states:
        ``All members shall refrain in their international relations from
    the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
    political independence of any state, or in any other manner
    inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.''
        The NATO Treaty contains similar language.
        8. We call on the U.S. government, in its own self interests and as
    the world's leader, to make a formal protest of Turkey's threats of war
    (casus belli) regarding the Aegean, made on a number of occasions and
    to state that Greece has the right to extend its territorial waters
    from 6 to 12 miles in accordance with the Law of the Sea Convention.
        9. We refute the Turkish claims concerning the application of the
    Law of the Sea Convention to the continental shelf and territorial
    waters, and questions pertaining to national air space. Turkey is free
    to go to the International Court of Justice at the Hague, if it thinks
    it has a supportable case.
        10. We call upon the U.S. and the international community to apply
    the strictest standards of nuclear non-proliferation to Turkey and to
    ensure that Turkey cannot divert any civilian nuclear facility to
    military use.
    Cyprus
        1. We support the unity, sovereignty, independence and territorial
    integrity of the Republic of Cyprus.
        2. We support a settlement for Cyprus based on a constitutional
    democracy embracing the key American principles of ``majority rule, the
    rule of law, and the protection of minority rights'' as called for by
    former President George Bush in 1988, and upholding the ``fundamental
    principles of human rights and democratic norms and practices'' as
    called for in the 1992 campaign statement of then Governor Clinton. We
    call for the provision for and implementation of the three basic
    freedoms, namely, freedom of movement, of property and of settlement. A
    constitutional settlement in Cyprus should be based on democratic
    principles that respect the rights of all Cypriots. We support efforts
    by the international community to reach a practical formulation of
    these principles.
        3. We welcome the opening of substantive accession negotiations
    between Cyprus and the European Union on November 10, 1998. We further
    welcome the statement from British Foreign Minister Robin Cook on
    November 10, 1998 that ``we have just completed the accession
    conference with the Republic of Cyprus and I am very pleased with the
    progress that is being made. We do not believe that accession of Cyprus
    should be made conditional on a solution to the division of the
    island.'' Cyprus' accession to the EU would confer economic, political,
    social, and cultural benefits to the whole island. We call upon the
    U.S. to continue its support for Cyprus' accession to the EU and to
    insist that Turkey ceases all efforts to interfere with this process.
        4. We condemn Turkey's attempts to hinder these negotiations, and
    further condemn the Turkish threat of annexation of the occupied part
    of Cyprus with Turkey if such accession transpires. Such actions, which
    the international community views as an attempt to dismember Cyprus,
    were condemned as illegal and invalid by SCR 541 (1983) of November 18,
    1983. SCR 550 (1984) of May 11, 1984, called upon all states to refrain
    from recognizing the occupied areas and from assisting or facilitating
    them in any way.
        5. The Cyprus problem is fundamentally a question of invasion and
    occupation by Turkish armed forces with the illegal use of American-
    supplied arms and equipment. There is no legal difference between
    Turkey's invasion and occupation of Cyprus and Iraq's invasion and
    occupation of Kuwait. We welcome the statement by Chairman Ben Gilman
    (R-NY) of the House International Affairs committee on June 10, 1998
    that ``the present situation on Cyprus, a division on the island and
    35,000 Turkish troops is a solution, their solution. This of course is
    completely unacceptable to our nation and the international
    community.''
        6. We call for:
      --insistence by the U.S. that Turkey and the Turkish Cypriots comply
            with the provisions of Security Council Resolutions 1217 (1998)
            and 1218 (1998) of December 23, 1998 for the purpose of
            achieving substantive progress toward a Cyprus settlement.
      --the removal of all Turkish troops including Turkey's illegal
            occupation forces from Cyprus;
      --the removal of all illegal Turkish colonists from Cyprus and a
            census of the illegal Turkish colonists under UN auspices;
      --the restoration to their original condition of the churches
            illegally converted to mosques in violation of the 1949 Geneva
            Convention;
      --the speedy return of the occupied areas of Morphou and Famagusta/
            Varosha and all other areas under occupation to the government
            of Cyprus under United Nations auspices and for the immediate
            resettlement of displaced persons.
      --cessation of all efforts by Turkey to interfere with Cyprus'
            accession negotiations with the European Union;
      --cessation of all measures to integrate the occupied areas of Cyprus
            with Turkey;
      --abandonment of Turkey's demand for recognition of the occupied
            areas as a sovereign state.
        7. We call upon the Administration to state its support for the
    immediate and complete demilitarization of Cyprus. We support the use
    of NATO forces for security purposes in Cyprus upon the
    demilitarization of Cyprus.
        8. Pending demilitarization we support the fundamental right of the
    Republic of Cyprus to acquire arms to defend itself. We condemn the
    Clinton Administration's campaign, instigated by the State Department,
    of relentless and unfair intimidation against Cyprus which led to the
    cancellation of the proposed acquisition of the S-300 defensive anti-
    aircraft system on December 29, 1998.
        9. We call on the U.S. to supply sufficient arms and equipment to
    the Republic of Cyprus to deter any potential attack by Turkey.
        10. We call on the Administration and the U.S. Congress in the
    interests of the United States to consider sanctions against Turkey if
    it fails to cooperate with these measures.
        11. We applaud the European Court of Human Rights ruling of July
    28, 1998, awarding damages to Ms. Titina Loizidou in the amount of an
    estimated $608,000 and another estimated $355,000 in costs and ordering
    Turkey to pay the damages and costs. This ruling followed from the
    ECHR's December 18, 1996 decision which found Turkey accountable for
    the continuing violation of human rights by its 1974 invasion and
    present day occupation of 37.3 percent of Cyprus. The 11 votes to 6
    ruling in the case of Loizidou vs. Turkey stated that the denial of
    access to the applicant's (Loizidou) property and consequent control
    thereof is imputable to Turkey, and amounts to a violation of the
    applicants property rights under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 of the
    European Convention on Human Rights.
        12. We condemn the actions of the illegal Turkish Cypriot regime,
    the Turkish military commander in Cyprus, and the Turkish government
    and military leadership, which regularly result in human tragedy,
    including:
      --October 13, 1996--Turkish troops shot and killed Mr. Petros
            Kakoullis, 58, a Greek Cypriot who accidentally wandered into
            the zone illegally occupied by Turkey while collecting snails
            with his son-in-law. According to eye-witness reports, Mr.
            Kakoullis was observed standing stationary and with his hands
            up. He was shot by two Turkish soldiers. After he fell to the
            ground he was shot again.
      --August 11-14, 1996--Turkish Cypriot security forces, led by the
            Turkish military, murdered two Greek Cypriots during a peaceful
            demonstration at the Green Line. Tassos Isaac was beaten to
            death on August 11 by a ravenous gang of Turks, the Grey
            Wolves, with Turkish security forces looking on. Solomos Spirou
            Solomou (Isaac's cousin) was shot to death, also by Turkish
            Cypriot security forces on August 14.
      --June 3, 1996--Turkish troops shot and killed an unarmed Greek
            Cypriot guardsman inside the U.N. buffer zone.
        We condemn these horrific and barbarous acts. The 1997 State
    Department Human Rights report issued January 30 states that ``there
    has not been any significant investigation by the Turkish Cypriot
    authorities of the killings.'' We call on the U.S. government take
    steps to ensure the apprehension and trial of the perpetrators.
        13. We note the statement by Turkish Cypriot leader, Rauf Denktash,
    on March 1, 1996 that members of the Turkish Cypriot militia, which was
    and is today under his control, in 1974 killed the 5 Americans and the
    missing Greek Cypriots in their custody. DNA tests have identified the
    remains of one of the missing Americans. A U.S. government
    investigation has concluded that the remaining four are most probably
    dead. We call upon the U.S. government to investigate thoroughly the
    validity of the Denktash statement and determine the circumstances in
    which the 5 Americans met their fate at the hands of the Turkish
    invasion forces and the Turkish Cypriot militia in 1974, identify the
    responsible parties and bring criminal charges. We further call upon
    the U.S. government to insist upon a proper accounting for the 1518
    Greek Cypriots who have been missing since the Turkish invasion.
    Arms sales and transfers to Turkey
        1. Despite the end of the Cold War, the Southeast European and the
    Eastern Mediterranean region remains excessively and dangerously armed.
    This is highly disadvantageous to regional economic development and the
    rational allocation of resources.
        2. We call upon the United States to halt the sale and transfers of
    arms to Turkey. Turkey's excessive military inventory, already far
    beyond its legitimate defense needs, already threatens the regional
    balance. A cessation of new supplies will reduce tensions and remove
    the cause of the regional arms race.
        3. In as much as Turkey represents the major obstacle to a peaceful
    resolution of the Aegean and Cyprus issues and is the primary cause of
    tensions in the region, we oppose any sale of advanced U.S. weapons to
    the military controlled government of Turkey as contrary to the best
    interests of the United States and regional stability.
        4. We condemn the January 1998 supply of three U.S. Navy ``Perry''
    class frigates to Turkey and the ongoing negotiations to sell advanced
    helicopters to Turkey.
        5. We believe the continued sale of advanced U.S. weapons to the
    military controlled government of Turkey jeopardizes the balance of
    military power between Greece and Turkey and threatens regional
    stability.
        6. We oppose the sale of any U.S. arms to the Turkish government as
    such sales violate U.S. laws because of Turkey's massive human rights
    violations in Turkey and Cyprus and the continuing illegal occupation
    of 37 percent of Cyprus, now in its 24th year.
        7. We congratulate the congressional and grassroots efforts against
    arms sales to Turkey. However, Turkey is undertaking a major
    modernization of its armed forces. Congress and the grassroots
    community must remain alert to any Turkish attempts to purchase
    advanced weapons systems beyond the amounts stipulated by U.S. laws.
        8. We support the introduction of S.1067 ``The Code of Conduct on
    Arms Transfers Act'' and HR 1757 ``The European Security Act'' in the
    106th Congress. This legislation would condition arms exports on
    minimum standards of conduct, basic respect for human rights, non-
    aggression, democratic form of governance, and participation in the UN
    Register of Conventional Arms.
        9. We call upon the Administration to ensure and Congress to
    monitor that no military technology or U.S. arms reach Turkey in
    violation of end user restrictions as the result of its defense
    relationship with Israel. We call upon the Administration and Congress
    to ensure that the Turkish-Israel relationship is not misused for
    aggressive action against third parties.
    Ecumenical patriarchate and the halki patriarchal school of theology
        1. Religious freedom is a basic human right as is the right of
    minorities to practice their religion freely and without interference.
    We therefore condemn the chronic persecution of Orthodox Christians in
    Turkey, the harassment of the Ecumenical Patriarch and the attacks on
    the Patriarchate in Istanbul, including the January 12, 1998 arson
    attack on the Church of Agios Therapon in Istanbul in which a 73-year
    old sexton, Vasilios Hadriaopolous, was murdered.
        2. We welcome the passage of Section 2804 of the 1999
    Appropriations bill passed on October 22, 1998 and signed into law
    containing provisions calling upon the United States to use its
    influence with the government of Turkey to guarantee the security of
    the Ecumenical Patriarchate in Istanbul and to reopen the Halki
    Theological School. The legislation states:
        ``It is the sense of Congress that the United States should use its
    influence with the Government of Turkey to suggest that the Government
    of Turkey--
              (1) recognize the Ecumenical Patriarchate and its
            nonpolitical, religious mission;
              (2) ensure the continued maintenance of the institution's
            physical security needs, as provided for under Turkish and
            international law, including the Treaty of Lausanne, the 1968
            Protocol, the Helsinki Final Act (1975) and the Charter of
            Paris;
              (3) provide for the proper protection and safety of the
            Ecumenical Patriarch and the Patriarchate personnel; and
              (4) reopen the Ecumenical Patriarchate's Halki Patriarchal
            School of Theology.''
        The Patriarchate issue was introduced at AHIPAC's initiative in the
    104th Congress through H.Con.Res. 50. This was carried forward in the
    105th Congress in the form of H. Con. Res 6. Congressman Mike Bilirakis
    (R-FL) introduced both resolutions which attracted numerous co-
    sponsors. We congratulate Congressman Bilirakis for his determination
    and persistence throughout this process.
        3. We condemn the desecration of Orthodox Christian cemeteries in
    Istanbul.
        4. On regular occasions in recent years senior Turkish politicians
    have threatened that the Agia Sofia Byzantine cathedral should be
    converted into a mosque. We call upon the Administration to inform
    Turkey that any such action would be regarded as a clear attack on the
    religious freedom of and basic respect for Orthodox Christians
    worldwide.
        5. We condemn the restrictions imposed by Turkey on the
    celebrations of the Saint Nicholas Festival, a saint worshipped by
    Christians throughout the world.
        6. We call on the U.S. government to protest these actions and to
    call on the government of Turkey:
      --to ensure religious freedom in Turkey;
      --to provide the proper protection of the Patriarchate and the
            Ecumenical Patriarch;
      --to establish conditions to prevent the recurrence of threats
            against the Patriarch and to ensure that the Patriarchate is
            free to carry out its mission; and
      --to permit persons to work at the Patriarchate without being Turkish
            citizens.
        7. We condemn the illegal closing by the Turkish Government in 1971
    of the Halki Patriarchal School of Theology, which closing is also in
    violation of Turkey's obligations under the UN Charter and other
    international agreements, and call on the U.S. government to make a
    formal request to Turkey to reopen the Halki Patriarchal School.
        8. We call for legislation to halt all arms sales and transfer to
    Turkey and to apply sanctions against Turkey until Turkey removes
    official restrictions on Christian churches and schools, and protects
    Christian clergy and property from acts of violence.
        9. We call upon Congress to enforce the provisions of all U.S.
    legislation regarding worldwide religious persecution, including that
    of Christians in Turkey.
    Greece
        1. We call on the United States to develop a ``special
    relationship'' with Greece as it has with the U.K. and Israel. The
    United States and Greece share common interests in the Eastern
    Mediterranean and Balkans. Greece is the key source of stability,
    prosperity, and peace in the Eastern Mediterranean and the key nation
    in the Balkans for the advancement of U.S. strategic, democratic,
    economic and stability interests in the Balkans. Greece played a
    leadership role in the successful European intervention in Albania in
    April 1997. In the November 4-5, 1997 Summit of Southeast European
    leaders in Crete, Greece demonstrated its long-term vision for regional
    stability. In January 1998 Greece played a mediating role in the
    volatile situation in Kosovo.
        2. Greece, a proven ally since WW I, played a pivotal role in the
    defeat of Hitler in World War II and an historic turning point role in
    the defeat of communism in the Greek civil war (1946-49) with U.S. aid
    under the Truman Doctrine but no U.S. combat troops. Greece, Great
    Britain, and France are the only nations which were allies of the U.S.
    in four wars in this century.
        3. We support Greece's right under international law to extend its
    territorial waters from 6 to 12 miles.
        4. The main security threat to Greece is Turkey. Foreign military
    sales to Greece should be sufficient to deter aggression from Turkey
    and, at a minimum, to ensure a military balance in accordance with
    congressional policy and the U.S.-Greece Defense Cooperation Agreement.
    Turkey
        1. We believe that a critical review of U.S.-Turkey relations is
    long overdue. This need arises from Turkey's undemocratic constitution
    under which the military strongly influences domestic policy as well as
    controlling foreign and national security policy. When combined with
    Turkey's excessive military strength, this strong military influence
    threaten regional stability. Turkey's continuing violations of
    international law, its unreliability as an ally, and recent foreign
    policy initiatives with regard to countries hostile to the U.S. such as
    Iran, require a critical review of U.S.-Turkey relations.
        2. We call on the U.S. government to conduct:
      --a reassessment of the thesis that Turkey's strategic value to the
            U.S. is such that the U.S. must forgo its fundamental
            principles and values and acquiesce in all aspects of Turkish
            policies; and
      --a reassessment of the U.S. policy of appeasing Turkey in current
            issues of dispute between Turkey and Greece and between Turkey
            and Cyprus.
        3. We offer the following recent actions by the Turkish government
    as reasons for such a review:
      --In January 1999 Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit questioned the
            U.S. right to use Turkish facilities for operations against
            Iraq;
      --In January 1999 the Turkish military barred the majority Virtue
            party from participating in the negotiations to form a new
            Turkish government;
      --Since the end of the Gulf War and continuing into 1999 Turkey has
            condoned the smuggling of oil from Iraq into Turkey, thus
            undermining international sanctions against Iraq and providing
            Iraq with a valuable source of hard currency to threaten U.S.
            interests.
      --Throughout 1998 senior Turkish officials made repeated territorial
            demands against sovereign Greek territory in the Aegean;
      --Throughout 1998 senior Turkish officials have raised what
            Ambassador Holbrooke has described as ``unacceptable demands''
            in relation to Cyprus;
      --In January 1998 the Turkish Constitutional Court banned the Refah
            party, barred its leaders from political participation, and
            confiscated its property;
      --In June 1997 the Turkish military carried out a de facto coup to
            remove the democratically elected coalition government of the
            Refah and True Path parties;
      --In October 1996 shoot-to-kill policies by Turkish troops in Cyprus
            claimed another Greek Cypriot civilian life (see section on
            Cyprus);
      --In September 1996 Turkey refused to assist the U.S. in its
            operations against Iraq;
      --In August 1996 Foreign Minister Tansu Ciller claimed that the green
            line between the Government controlled area of Cyprus and the
            illegally occupied northern zone represented one of Turkey's
            international boundaries;
      --From August to December 1996 Turkey concluded significant
            commercial contracts with Iran and Libya in violation of U.S.
            laws and policy; and concluded a trade agreement with Cuba in
            opposition to U.S. policy; and
      --In January 1996 Turkey sought to provoke hostilities with Greece
            over Aegean territories that are overwhelmingly accepted by the
            international community as Greek (see section on Aegean).
        4. Turkey's numerous and continuing violations of United States
    laws, the United Nations Charter, the North Atlantic Treaty and
    international law by its continuing aggression in and occupation of
    Cyprus, its illegal shipment of arms to the Azeris and to the Balkans,
    its threats against Greece in the Aegean and Western Thrace, its
    massive and horrendous human rights violations against its Kurdish
    citizens and its policy of torture nationwide, must not be tolerated or
    condoned any longer. The appeasement of Turkey's violations of the rule
    of law and the application of a double standard on the rule of law and
    human rights to Turkey must end. Turkey is the source of tension in its
    region, not the solution.
        5. We call for legislation to halt all arms sales or transfers; to
    implement sanctions against Turkey; and to require U.S. representatives
    in multilateral agencies to vote against any aid to Turkey until:
      --Turkey allows free and unfettered monitoring of the human rights
            environment within its territory by domestic and international
            human rights monitoring organizations, including but not
            limited to the Turkish Human Rights Association, the Conference
            on Security and Cooperation in Europe, Amnesty International,
            and Human Rights Watch;
      --Turkey recognizes the civil, cultural, and human rights of its
            Kurdish citizens, ceases its military operations against
            Kurdish civilians, and takes demonstrable steps towards a
            peaceful resolution of the Kurdish issue;
      --Turkey takes demonstrable steps toward the total withdrawal of its
            military forces, and illegal Turkish settlers from Cyprus and
            demonstrates its support for a fair settlement recognizing the
            sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Cyprus
            with a constitutional democracy based on majority rule, the
            rule of law and the protection of minority/human rights;
      --Turkey lifts its blockade of U.S. and international assistance to
            Armenia;
      --Turkey lifts official restrictions on Christian churches and
            schools, and offers sufficient protection against acts of
            violence and harassment against the clergy and vandalism
            against church and school property; and
      --Turkey is in compliance with the United Nations Charter and
            relevant U.N. resolutions, the North Atlantic Treaty, the
            Helsinki Final Act of the Conference on Security and
            Cooperation in Europe, the UN Universal Declaration of Human
            Rights, the European Convention on Human Rights and is not
            engaged in a consistent pattern of gross violations of
            internationally recognized human rights (within the meaning of
            sections 116 and 502B of the United States Foreign Assistance
            Act of 1961, as amended).
                             other regional issues
    Albania
        1. We continue to be concerned about the threat to the Greek
    Orthodox community in Albania by denying and restricting the full
    legal, educational, religious, and employment rights guaranteed to the
    minority by international agreements signed by Albania.
        2. We call on the United States government, in its own interest and
    the interest of maintaining peace and stability in the southern
    Balkans, to undertake an intense diplomatic dialogue with the
    government of Albania to ensure that the issues of the rule of law and
    minority and human rights cited above are resolved.
    Armenia
        1. We support the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act which was passed by
    the Congress and signed into permanent law as part of the 1997 Foreign
    Aid Bill. The act calls for a halt in U.S. economic and military
    assistance to any country blocking U.S. assistance to another country,
    which consequently includes the Turkish blockade of U.S. assistance to
    Armenia. The Turkish embargo on aid to Armenia includes U.S.
    humanitarian and pharmaceutical aid.
        2. We believe it is in the U.S. interest to insist that the Turkish
    government lift its blockade of Armenia.
        3. We strongly disagree with the Administration's waiver, on
    national security grounds, of the Humanitarian Aid Corridor Act as it
    applies to Turkey. The application of this waiver is contrary to the
    national security interests of the United States. We urge Congress to
    pass legislation removing economic aid from the President's waiver
    authority.
        4. We believe it is in the interests of the United States to
    commemorate on a regular basis the Armenian Genocide of 1915-23 and
    strongly to urge Turkey to recognize this tragic historical event it
    its past.
        5. We support legislation similar to H. Con. Res. 47 in the 104th
    Congress and other efforts which commemorate the Armenian Genocide, and
    call for the recognition of the Genocide by the government of Turkey.
    This includes initiatives which place sanctions on U.S. aid to Turkey
    until the Turkish government takes all appropriate steps to acknowledge
    and commemorate the Genocide committed against the Armenian population
    of the Ottoman Empire from 1915 to 1923.
    Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM)
        1. We call on the United States, in its own self interest, to
    support a name for this Former Yugoslav Republic which does not include
    the word ``Macedonia.''
        2. Classical Macedonia's Hellenic Heritage is well documented by
    archaeological evidence and the writings of internationally known
    historians. Since antiquity, the name Macedonia has referred to a
    geographic region and not to a specific nationality.
    Kurds
        1. The capture of the PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan on February 16,
    1999 has focused world attention on the aspirations of the Kurdish
    people for self-determination. It has also highlighted the brutally
    repressive measures used by the Turkish military, including genocide
    and other crimes against humanity, to suppress these aspirations. It is
    a matter of intense shame for American values and principles that U.S.
    supplied weapons are used for these genocidal purposes. We call upon
    the Administration to demand and ensure that Mr. Ocalan receives a fair
    and public trial in accordance with international norms and that he is
    accorded the right to defend himself through legal counsel of his
    choice.
        2. The Kurdish people have an equal right to self-determination as
    the Kosovo Albanians and other peoples to whom the U.S. and NATO has
    provided support. We call upon the U.S., NATO, and other international
    organizations to show an equal concern for the Kurdish rights and to
    take equivalent action as in the Balkans to ensure that Turkey respects
    these rights.
        3. The mass flights of Kurds from Turkey in December 1997/January
    1998 demonstrate that Turkey's ethnic cleansing and genocidal war
    against its Kurdish minority is making their life intolerable in
    Turkey. We believe the United States should support political and
    cultural freedom and autonomy for the Kurds in Turkey and Iraq.
        4. We believe it is in the best interests of the United States and
    to stability in the region to support the political rights of the
    Kurdish minorities in Turkey, Iraq, and Iran. If the popular wills of
    the Kurds call for a federal solution to their problem, the U.S.
    government should honor that decision. Such a decision will bring
    stability to a volatile region, and help establish the foundations of
    civil society and economic progress. We note that Turkey refuses to
    give minority rights and human rights to its 20 percent Kurdish
    minority, while claiming equality for the 18 percent Turkish Cypriot
    minority.
        5. We call for the immediate halt by the government of Turkey of
    its military and paramilitary operations (with the illegal use of U.S.
    supplied and produced weapons) against the Kurdish minority and its
    massive violations of the human rights and ethnic cleansing of its
    Kurdish minority which is genocidal in nature.
        6. We cite the recent reports by the U.S. State Department, Human
    Rights Watch, and Amnesty International which highlight Turkey's use of
    U.S. weapons in committing human rights violations against its Kurdish
    citizens.
        7. We call on the United States government to stop supplying arms
    to the government of Turkey based on the stated reports.
        8. We call on the United States in its own self-interest to halt
    all assistance to Turkey, of whatever nature, until Turkey ceases its
    military and paramilitary operations and its massive human rights
    violations against its Kurdish minority.
        9. We are saddened that the U.S. military and economic assistance
    to Turkey over the past fourteen years of Turkey's military and ethnic
    cleansing against the Kurds makes the U.S. an accessory to Turkey's
    crimes against its Kurdish minority.
    NATO
        1. As the vigorous NATO engagement in the Balkans shows, NATO has
    the potential to act as a catalyst for the region's problems. We have
    long called for a NATO force on Cyprus under UN auspices and acting in
    full respect of Cyprus' sovereignty as a component of a settlement of
    the Cyprus problem. However, under pressure from the U.S. government,
    NATO has applied a double standard to Turkey on the rule of law. NATO's
    toleration of Turkey's aggression against Cyprus in violation of its
    own Treaty and the UN Charter is a stain on NATO's record and honor.
    NATO should call for the immediate removal of Turkey's illegal
    occupation forces and settlers from Cyprus and the demilitarization of
    Cyprus coupled with a military force to augment the U.N. peacekeeping
    force. If Turkey refuses to cooperate, NATO should consider appropriate
    action to bring Turkey into compliance.
        2. Turkey's invasion and occupation of Cyprus are a continuing
    violation of the NATO charter. On January 21, 1998, Turkey's banning of
    the Welfare Party was called ``strong-arming'' by the Washington Post
    which described Turkey's membership in NATO as an ``embarrassing
    anomaly.'' The implication is that if Turkey were seeking to join NATO
    today, it would not be eligible. We call on the U.S. to encourage NATO
    members to apply pressure to Turkey to abide by the clear and
    unambiguous requirements of the NATO Treaty to desist from aggression
    against other states and to reform the constitution of Turkey to
    reflect normal Western standards of civilian democracy.
        3. We call upon NATO to take appropriate action to bring Turkey
    into compliance with the NATO Treaty preamble and article 1, the UN
    Charter article 2 (4) and international law.
                                   EXHIBIT 2

                  [From the Los Angeles Times, Nov. 19, 1998]

                    Another Problematic Extradition Question

                                (By John Tirman)

        Europe now faces two perplexing extradition cases. The first and
    more famous is that of Gen. Augusto Pinochet, accused of thousands of
    murders during his 17-year dictatorship in Chile. The second involves
    Abdullah Ocalan, the Kurdish guerrilla leader who fought an
    authoritarian regime in Turkey for almost 15 years. Both cases present
    wrenchiing questions for human right and peace.
        While the Pinochet case is not easy to resolve, it looks simple
    compared with Ocalan's. The prosecution of Pinochet, for example, might
    have a divisive impact on a healing Chilean society. In Ocalan's case,
    a bitter civil war still rages.
        The 49-year-old Kurd has conducted a violent guerrilla campaign
    against the Turks since 1984. He was based in Syria, which protected
    him until Turkey threatened war this autumn. Ocalan fled to Russia and
    was arrested after flying to Rome last week. Turkey his demanded
    extradition. Italy, which will not extradite for political prosecutions
    or if the accused may be executed, is studying the matter.
        The cause of the rebellion by Ocalan's Kurdistan Workers Party, or
    PKK, is indeed political--namely, the savage treatment of the Kurdish
    population in Turkey for 70 years. The Kurdish people, settled in
    southeastern Anatolia long before the Turks arrived from Central Asia,
    lived peacefully under the Ottoman Empire. But under the Turkish
    Republic created by Kemal Ataturk in 1923, Kurds have been subjected to
    repeated pogroms. They have been forbidden from using their language
    and customs. The southeast is impoverished and shortchanged by the
    central government in Ankara.
        These indignities stirred several uprisings, but the PKK's is the
    most serious. It has led the Turkish military to crack down on all
    expressions of dissent over its Kurdish policy. No Kurdish political
    parties can function. Several Kurdish members of Parliament, including
    the dissident Leyla Zana, are jailed. More than 3,200 Kurdish villages
    have been evacuated by the military, with 2 million villagers forced
    out of their homes. Some 35,000 people have died in the fighting
    between the PKK and the military since 1984. The military will not
    consider any political solution to the uprising, such as granting full
    language rights or permitting Kurdish parties, because of its rigid
    Turkish nationalism.
        The evacuation policy and continuing repression are among the worst
    human rights violations in the world. The extradition of Ocalan to
    Turkey, which would certainly result in his execution, would reinforce
    the Turkish military's belligerence. Without some conditions on
    extradition, Ocalan's trial and death would accomplish nothing.
        Here is where the application of law must be flexible. To their
    credit, the Italians recognize this. But how to proceed? To flatly deny
    extradition is wrong: Ocalan almost certainly ordered many executions
    of noncombatants like Turkish teachers in the southeast. These are
    vicious, criminal acts. But before sending him back, the Italians
    should insist on certain conditions.
        The most ambitious condition would be an actual end to the civil
    war, with the Turks granting full political and social rights to Kurds
    and the PKK demobilizing. Truth commissions and war crimes
    investigations could follow. But that might be too much to hope for.
        Instead, the Italians may choose a less dramatic course: Demand the
    release of political prisoners such as Zana in exchange for Ocalan.
    This would be momentous and symbolic, because Zana and other dissidents
    represent the nonviolent path of reform. By prosecuting Ocalan only for
    criminal acts of violence and by not imposing a death sentence, Turkey
    would in effect be saying it, too, is choosing the path of peaceful
    reform. Ocalan could be persuaded by the Italians to guarantee a
    permanent cease-fire.
        It would then be time for Turkey's friends, like the United States,
    to insist on the political reforms that would satisfy Kurdish
    grievances. In fact, the U.S. is crucial to overcoming Turkish
    resistance to such a bargain.
        In these volatile political cases, extradition can be a tool to
    achieve something larger. For Pinochet, it might be possible to
    prosecute without imprisonment, establishing an important standard of
    accountability. For Ocalan, the real goal is to prevent more deaths and
    refugees and to broaden human rights. In both cases, justice is served
    imperfectly so that peace is served more generously.
                                   EXHIBIT 3

                [From the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Feb. 22, 1999]

                      Kurds Again are Viewed as Disposable

                            (By Elizabeth Sullivan)

        The world's largest non-nation is betrayed again.
        The Kurds, a mountain breed with the tribalism and rich hospitality
    to prove it, just have the bad luck to live on one of the world's great
    invasion alleys. It has made them tough warriors. They harried
    Alexander the Great on his way to pillage the Persians, and, before
    him, Xenophon.
        That was a millennium and a half before Turks even showed up on the
    scene. The Kurdish homeland, mostly in modern Turkey but stretching
    across Iraq, Iran and Syria, was the bridge between Europe and the
    Middle East. Today, an estimated 15 million to 25 million Kurds still
    live in a contiguous land that is not a country. Promised statehood in
    1920, they've gotten nothing but broken promises and the abuse only
    great powers can mete out--arms, succor, funding, then abandonment--in
    regular cycles. During the Cold War, Soviet-bloc weapons and Marxist
    safe havens enabled a Kurdish insurgency to kill more than 5,000
    Turkish soldiers and make its mountain strongholds no-go zones for
    NATO's second-largest army.
        But the Turks got tough. Since 1984, they have killed more than
    26,000 rebels and cleansed traditional Kurdish villages in the
    southeastern mountain valleys. Half of the Kurdish population of
    Turkey--about 6 million people may have been displaced. And the
    military operation continues. And all of this has had the tacit support
    of NATO, which needs Turkey's Incirlik air base for operations against
    Saddam Hussein. It's widely believed that U.S. intelligence intercepts,
    shared with Turkey, got commandos to the very spot in Kenya where the
    insurgents' mustachioed, ladies-man leader, Abdullah Ocalan, was
    snatched a week ago. So congratulations, Turkey. Through sheer
    brutality and repression, you're solving your Kurdish problem.
        Contrast this with Kosovo, hundreds of miles to the north. There,
    the international community is forbidding a Yugoslav security crackdown
    on an armed Albanian insurgency that has taken 2,000 lives and
    displaced about 200,000 people. NATO is prepared to enforce the
    prohibition with bombs and soldiers. Yet both insurgencies are inside
    sovereign nations. In each, insurgents use imported arms and the ugly
    tactic of murdering and kidnapping co-ethnics who work for the
    ``oppressor.'' Kurdish rebels have singled out village schoolteachers
    in a particularly heinous campaign. Albanian guerrillas pick off court
    clerks, postal and utility workers. Both insurgencies feed off the
    profits of drug smugglers--the modern world's equivalent of Alexander's
    armies, plying the East-West routes. But there are three crucial
    differences.
        First, Turkey is America's friend, ally and bulwark against Russian
    disintegration, Iraqi instability, Iranian military expansionism and
    pan-Arab fundamentalism. Yugoslavia is so demeaned as a nation that
    America denies it its founders' seat in the United Nations, refuses
    even to call it Yugoslavia and, as the final insult, has said an
    ``outer wall'' of sanctions that has brought Yugoslavia's economy to
    its knees will not be lifted, even if there is a Kosovo settlement.
        Yugoslavia under Slobodan Milosevic is seen as so irredeemable that
    Washington directs military aid to a neighbor, Albania, parts of which
    are in a state of near-anarchy. The second difference is that
    Yugoslavia once treated its Albanians a lot better than it does now.
    They used to have autonomy, plum state jobs, schooling in the Albanian
    language and a whiff of statehood. Now, they have nothing they don't
    provide themselves. So Yugoslavia has gone backwards.
        Turkey has had nowhere to go but forward. It wasn't until 1991 that
    its Kurds could speak Kurdish without breaking the law. They used to be
    called ``mountain Turks.'' Now a few hardy souls in the media actually
    call them ``Kurdish-origin Turks.'' Believe it or not, that's a big
    step forward in Turkey.
        Finally, Yugoslav Slavs really do hate Albanians, and vice versa.
    They have not intermarried, as have Kurds and Turks. They practice
    different religions. And they hate one another for what has been taken
    from them. Both have fought for years, without success, to make a
    nation for all the world's Albanians and Serbs. Only slightly more than
    half the Albanians in the Balkans actually live in Albania.
        During World War II, Albanians in Kosovo sided with the Axis
    powers. Many Serbs were killed, jailed or expelled from a region that
    has sacred meaning for them as the cradle of Serbian culture. After the
    war--and a period of frenzied but sanctioned bloodletting against
    rebellious Albanians--Yugoslavia's new Communist government prevented
    tens of thousands of displaced Serbs from reclaiming their land in
    Kosovo.
        And NATO didn't threaten once to bomb.
        The moral of this story? Geopolitics runs the world. And the Kurds
    are on the losing side of its ledger, again.
                                   EXHIBIT 4
                             American Hellenic Institute, Inc.,
                                        Washington, DC, April 28, 1998.

    Re The record of Turkey's unreliability as an ally.

    Hon. Sonny Callahan,
    Chairman, House Appropriations Subcommittee on Foreign Operations,
            House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
        Dear Chairman Callahan: In discussion arising from my testimony on
    March 31, 1998, on the Administration's foreign aid proposals, you said
    that in fairness to Turkey that you had been informed that Turkey had
    been with us ``every time.'' It gave me the opportunity to reply that
    the facts were otherwise and I gave a few examples.
        Turkey has poured large sums of money for decades into efforts to
    influence U.S. congressional and public opinion. These large sums
    (averaging $3-4 million annually) have enabled Turkey's multiple stable
    of U.S. agents registered with the Justice Department under the Foreign
    Agents Registration Act to routinely misinform the Congress and the
    public as to Turkey's reliability as an ally.
        Much to my regret, officials in the State and Defense Departments
    have done little to set the record straight. As I mentioned in our
    discussion,Turkey's record of support for the U.S. is an inglorious
    one. The most recent instance was on display in January 1998 at the
    time of the crisis over inspections of suspected Iraqi weapons of mass
    destruction sites. On this occasion, Turkey made clear to the U.S. that
    it would not permit use of facilities in Turkey for military strikes
    against Iraq.
        This record of Turkish unreliability in times of crisis has a long
    history. In the climactic events of the first half of this century, the
    two world wars, Turkey either fought against the U.S. (World War I) or
    was neutral (World War II) during which time Turkey collaborated with
    Nazi Germany by supplying vital chromium and other raw material
    supplies. Albert Speer, the Nazi production minister, credited these
    supplies for fueling the German war machine long enough to prolong
    World War II for at least seven months. (See Albert Speer, Inside the
    Third Reich).
        During the Cold War, Turkey's role was once again ambivalent. Time
    and time again Turkey gave aid and succor to the Soviet Union. Examples
    include:
        (1) During the 1973 Mid-East War, predating the Turkish invasion of
    Cyprus by one year, Turkey refused the United States military
    overflight rights to resupply Israel and granted the USSR overland
    military convoy rights to resupply Syria and Iraq, and military
    overflight per-mission to resupply Egypt. A member of the Turkish
    Foreign Policy Institute in Ankara wrote: ``During the Arab-Israeli war
    of 1973, Moscow's overflights of Turkish airspace were tolerated. On
    the other hand, during the same Middle East conflict, Turkey refused to
    allow the United States refueling and reconnaissance facilities during
    the American airlift to Israel.'' Karaosmanoglu, ``Turkey's Security
    and the Middle East,'' 52 Foreign Affairs 157, 163 (Fall 1983).
        (2) In the 1977-1978 conflict in Ethiopia, Turkey granted the
    Soviets military overflight rights to supply the pro-Soviet Ethiopian
    communists under Col. Mengistu, who eventually prevailed. C. Meyer,
    Facing Reality--From World Federalism to the CIA 276-80 (1980).
        (3) Over NATO objections, Turkey allowed three Soviet aircraft
    carriers, the Kiev on July 18, 1976, the Minsk on Feb. 25, 1979 and the
    Novorosiisk on May 16, 1983, passage rights through the Bosphorus and
    Dardanelles straits into the Mediterranean in violation of the Montreux
    Convention of 1936. See generally Wash. Post, July 19, 1976, at A 16,
    col. 1; N.Y. Times, Feb. 26, 1979, at A 13, col. 1. The Soviet ships
    posed a formidable threat to the United States Sixth Fleet.
        (4) In 1979 Turkey refused to allow the United States to send 69
    marines and six helicopters to American military facilities at Incirlik
    in Turkey for possible use in evacuating Americans from Iran. N.Y.
    Times, Feb. 13, 1979, at A8, col. 3.
        (5) Again in 1979, Turkey refused the United States request to
    allow U-2 intelligence flights (for Salt II verification) over Turkish
    airspace ``unless Moscow agreed.'' N.Y. Times, May 15, 1979, at Al,
    col. 3. This position was voiced over a period of months by Turkish
    officials, the opposition party and the military Chief of Staff, Gen.
    Kenan Evren. See id.
        (6) In May 1989, Turkey rejected an American request to inspect an
    advanced MIG-29 fighter plane, flown by a Soviet defector to Turkey.
    N.Y. Times, May 28, 1989, at A 12, col. 1.
        (7) The Turkish government refused repeated American requests for
    the installation of antennas in Turkey concerning 11 transmitters whose
    broadcasts would have been directed primarily to the Soviet Union and
    its eastern European satellites. The initiative by the United States
    Department of State sought to improve reception of programs broadcast
    by Radio Free Europe, Radio Liberty, and the Voice of America.
        (8) Turkey further damaged NATO by vetoing NATO's effort to put
    military bases on various Greek islands in the Aegean for defensive
    purposes against the Soviet navy.
        As long ago as 1974 strategic analyst Edward Luttwak explained the
    nature of Turkey's deal with the Soviet Union. He wrote:
        ``Eager to normalize relations with their formidable neighbor, the
    Turks have chosen to conciliate the Russians, and have been able to do
    so at little or no direct cost to themselves. It is only in respect to
    strategic transit that Turkey is of primary importance to the Soviet
    Union, and this is the area where the concessions have been made. . . .
    The alliance relationship in NATO and with the United States no doubt
    retains a measure of validity in Turkish eyes, but it is apparent that
    its supportive effect is not enough to counteract Russian suasion.''
    Luttwak, The Political Uses of Sea Power 60-61 (1974).
        After the Cold War, Turkey's unreliability as an ally continued. In
    the Persian Gulf War, Turkey sat on the sidelines throughout Desert
    Shield, refusing to send any forces to the U.S.-led coalition, refusing
    to authorize a second land front from Turkey (see Wash. Post Jan. 16,
    1991 p. A6, col. 5) and refusing to allow the use of the NATO airbase
    at Incirlik, Turkey.
        Desert Storm began on January 16, 1991. It was not until over 48
    hours after the air war had begun on January 16, 1991 and only after
    the Iraqi air force and air defenses had been neutralized and the U.S.
    had achieved air superiority that Turkey allowed a limited number of
    sorties out of Incirlik. Only one out of twenty coalition sorties
    originated in Turkey. The Turkish military and Turkish public opinion
    opposed the use of Incirlik.
        Finally, as mentioned earlier, in January 1998 at the time of the
    crisis over inspections of suspected Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
    sites, Turkey made clear to the U.S. that it would not permit use of
    facilities in Turkey for military strikes against Iraq.
        These examples are drawn from the great events of this century.
    Taken together, they demonstrate that Turkey's support for America has
    been at best opportunistic. When it suits Turkey or when it can extract
    a quid pro quo from us, Turkey leans toward us. Unlike our other allies
    who have stood with us through thick and thin, Turkey looks elsewhere
    whenever it can.
        As a counterweight to the routine misrepresentation by Turkey's
    U.S. agents and Executive Branch officials of Turkey's reliability as
    an ally, I am sending copies of this letter to the Congress. I will
    also send it to the President and the pertinent Executive Branch
    officials.
        As mentioned in my testimony, we congratulate you, the
    Subcommittee, and the full Committee on the role each played in finally
    halting military aid and economic grant aid to Turkey, thus ending this
    part of the U.S. complicity in Turkey's violations of law and human
    rights in Turkey and Cyprus.
                Sincerely,
                                            Eugene T. Rossides,
                                                       General Counsel.
                                     ______

        Prepared Statement of the International Education and Training
                                   Coalition
        ``On a society-wide scale, the denial of education harms the cause
    of democracy and social progress--and, by extension, international
    peace and security.''--State of the World's Children 1999, UNICEF
                            introduction and summary
        The International Education and Training Coalition (IETC)
    represents over 60 of the United States' leading organizations in basic
    education, literacy, higher education, vocational education, and skills
    training. Members include nonprofit organizations, higher education
    institutions, commercial organizations, and educational associations
    with thousands of members in the United States and throughout the
    world.
        The diverse organizations of the IETC share a common mission: to
    strengthen human capacity within the developing world as an essential
    component of sustainable and equitable development. The IETC seeks to
    build a broad base of U.S. support for international education and
    training activities and to elevate attention and resources to this area
    within the U.S. development cooperation agenda. The IETC is a source of
    expertise on the importance of U.S. leadership in international
    education and training through the following activities:
      --Providing accurate and current information to Congress;
      --Fostering dialogue between the U.S. Agency for International
            Development (USAID) and American practioners on current themes
            and issues; and
      --Assisting in the development of new programs and policies.
        The purpose of this testimony is threefold:
        (1) to demonstrate to Congress how U.S. investments in
    international education and training advance the national interests of
    the United States;
        (2) to provide a clearer picture of these programs and their
    impacts on the lives of people in poorer nations; and
        (3) to recommend specific areas where Congress can support
    international education and training in the appropriation of fiscal
    year 2000 foreign operations.
        With the start of a new Congress and an expected change of
    leadership at USAID, this is a critical time to reinforce U.S.
    leadership and recognize commitments made in international education
    and training. Investments in education and training are critical to
    reducing poverty, curbing rapid population growth, improving child
    health, and all other goals for effective U.S. development assistance.
    An educated populace provides the foundation for the broad-based
    prosperity that creates new markets for U.S. exports and for the
    democracy and stability that preclude costly U.S. interventions in
    crises. Congress should, therefore, provide adequate funding for the
    programs and staff dedicated to building human capacity in the
    developing world.
                            u.s. national interests
        Today one billion people in the world's poorest countries are
    illiterate, with women and girls comprising the majority of this group.
    This not only translates to an unnecessary loss of potential and
    productivity but also actively undermines the advancement of U.S.
    foreign policy, as well as economic and humanitarian interests in the
    developing world. Investments in education and training are powerful
    and proven tools for changing this reality. An educated and skilled
    populace is critical to achieving self-reliance so that countries may
    graduate from U.S. assistance, to improving the quality of life for
    millions of children and families, to developing viable partners for
    U.S. business and consumers for U.S. products, and to creating
    conditions for sustained peace, democracy, and respect for human
    rights.
        Education and the potential for individual growth are fundamental
    American values.--An educated populace is essential to our sense of
    citizenship, culture, and a well-functioning society. We believe that
    children have the right to education, and adults the right to realize
    their potential. When U.S. aid programs invest in helping other nations
    improve their education systems, they pass on American models that
    focus on democracy and interactive learning. The United States holds a
    significant comparative advantage in education and training: it has the
    most respected and extensive higher education system in the world and
    leads the world in the development and use of modern information
    technologies. Moreover, the U.S. is involved in a number of education
    policy initiatives on improving equity and undertaking systemic reform
    in urban schools that can provide lessons for education problems in
    other nations.
        Education and training build markets for U.S. exports by
    stimulating broad-based economic growth and increased consumption of
    U.S. goods, creating new American jobs.--U.S. prosperity in the 1990s
    is largely attributable to an expansion in overseas trade, and the
    fastest area of this export growth is to the developing world.
    Education is a leading contributor to the economic growth that has made
    this possible. Studies have shown that increased education alone
    accounts for 12 to 20 percent of annual GNP growth in countries as
    economically and politically diverse as South Korea, Malaysia, Ghana,
    and Colombia.
        In addition to promoting universal basic education, the U.S.
    targets training programs that advance market-oriented economic
    systems. For example, utilizing the skills gained under a USAID
    training program coordinated by IETC members the Africa-America
    Institute and the Council of Graduate Schools, the University of Asmara
    in Eritrea has taken a lead role in training and modernizing the skills
    of the country's school teachers, journalists, public administrators,
    and engineers. Through their efforts, the university is developing a
    work-force with the technological skills to usher in and maintain an
    export-oriented economy that will directly benefit and attract more
    American investment to the region.
        Education and training enable nations to prevent and mitigate
    conflicts and crises, avoiding costly U.S. intervention, and contribute
    to the promotion of democracy, pluralism, and tolerance.--Increased
    opportunity for education and training acts as a counterbalance to
    migration and helps hold together the social fabric of divided
    societies, contributing to leaders with broadness of vision and an
    appreciation of diversity. For those in refugee camps or other crisis
    environments, education and training offer a promising means for
    helping to rebuild their lives. In non-democratic regimes, education
    and training can lead to broader citizen participation. In nations in
    transition to democracy, people require new technical skills and
    governance techniques to build sustainable institutions.
        Education and training give people the knowledge and skills
    necessary to fully participate in their nations' public affairs and are
    therefore fundamental to sustain democracy. As part of the USAID
    Community Schools Activities Program in Ethiopia, IETC member World
    Learning has assisted local communities and administrative bodies in
    embracing the idea that they can effect change in their children's
    schooling. This new level of local participation in decision making has
    led not only to successful initiatives to improve school quality, but
    also to community involvement in other social and economic domains.
    Through a partnership with the University of Florida, Makerere
    University in Uganda established the Human Rights and Peace Center. The
    Center, the first of its kind in Africa, is devoted to teaching,
    researching, and compiling local materials on human rights.
        Education and training, especially for women, are key to the
    promotion of broad social benefits, including lower birth rates,
    reduced infant mortality, and improved child and family health.--The
    former prime minister of India stated, ``Educate a boy, and you educate
    a person. Educate a girl, and you educate a whole family.'' Girls and
    women who are educated are more likely to delay marriage and
    childbearing. On average, an extra year of schooling reduces female
    fertility by up to 10 percent in developing countries. Reducing
    population growth, in turn, reduces pressures on limited natural
    resources. An educated woman is also more likely to seek medical help
    and practice better nutrition and hygiene for her family, lowering
    infant and maternal mortality. Furthermore, expanding educational
    opportunities for girls so that they are equitable with those for boys
    contributes to an increased labor force, productivity and economic
    growth.
        In a region where most girls are married by age 13 and the female
    literacy rate is less than two percent, an ambitious USAID and UNICEF
    program in rural Pakistan successfully tackled the low enrollment rate
    of girls. By involving both the local community and the national
    government, and by supporting professional development for female
    teachers, within three years the program has established 122 girls'
    primary schools and enrolled nearly 74 percent--4,183 girls--of school
    age girls in the community.
        The relationships formed with Americans and the linkages
    established with U.S. institutions by participants in training and
    development programs provide the basis for long-term, mutually
    productive activities.--These activities help to improve America's
    image in developing countries with national leaders and ordinary
    citizens alike. When foreign publics appreciate American values,
    technology, and know-how, the task of U.S. diplomacy is easier.
    Furthermore, people who have learned English and are familiar with
    American culture and products are more likely to establish trade
    relationships with the United States and create investment
    opportunities for Americans.
        For example, 289 exchanges have occurred between the University of
    Missouri and the University of the Western Cape in South Africa,
    resulting in mutual gains in knowledge in areas such as water resource
    management. Kentuckians have similarly benefited from the over 350
    Latin American local officials and community leaders who have come to
    the University of Louisville for training. St. Louis Community College
    has trained more than 200 staff from Guyana's technical institutes,
    thereby assisting Guyana to boost the skills of its labor force.
        In sum, investments in education and training are clearly in the
    U.S. national interest. Americans benefit as the people of developing
    and transitional countries gain the skills, abilities, and resources
    needed to address their own nations' problems. A clear commitment from
    the United States and other nations is needed to avert the tremendous
    costs associated with the lost human potential and delayed global
    development stemming from unmet education and training needs. In
    partnership with the U.S. government, American higher education
    institutions, non-profit organizations, for-profit firms, and
    educational associations have the capabilities to make fundamental
    contributions to human capital development throughout the world.
        a closer look at education and training in the developing world
        When human capacity is developed to its fullest, people are able to
    survive and prosper, to realize innate potential and to take their
    destinies into their own hands, and to participate more broadly in
    society. This ability to learn and improve is the only way to ensure
    lasting results, particularly in the age of globalization, with a
    constant progression of social, economic, and technological changes. In
    short, education and training build human capital, which serves as
    every country's most important resource base.
        U.S. development assistance is not used to directly educate
    children and adults overseas; that is the responsibility of national
    governments. U.S. education aid, together with host country
    governments, helps shape public policies to improve the access and
    quality of education and training, and provides technical assistance in
    areas such as teacher training, curriculum development, and skills
    training. The delivery of U.S. assistance also focuses on alleviating
    resource inequities for under-served populations, mobilizing community
    and parent involvement in schools, decentralizing decision-making and
    accountability, and applying cost-effective information technology.
        U.S. education and training programs encompass a spectrum of
    lifelong learning opportunities, from classroom-based and informal
    schooling for children, to adult basic education, to specialized
    technical training and university scholarship. As the short summaries
    below illustrate, each makes an undeniable contribution to economic and
    social well-being.
        Basic education.--The acquisition of functional literacy, numeracy
    and problem-solving skills are the foundation upon which all learning
    rests and is therefore the top priority for U.S. bilateral development
    assistance. Investments in universal primary education, particularly
    for girls, have been shown to be the single most economically
    productive investment that a country can make for its citizens.
    Recognizing this, the U.S. and the nations of the OECD agreed to work
    to achieve universal primary education in all countries by 2015 and
    gender equity in primary and secondary education by 2005. With 130
    million children in the developing world still denied access to basic
    education--many in situations of exploitative labor--and millions of
    others relegated to abysmal learning environments, there is much to do.
        USAID and its outside partners concentrate on expanding access to
    quality basic education for under-served populations by helping
    countries improve education policies, build institutional capacity,
    adopt effective teaching methods, and encourage the use of improved
    educational materials and technologies. For example, in a program
    funded by USAID, IETC member the Academy for Educational Development
    has assisted more than 1,300 multi-grade schools in the rural highlands
    of Guatemala. By actively involving local communities and training
    rural teachers, these schools have demonstrated high rates of success
    in enrolling and retaining poor indigenous students, particularly
    girls.
        Higher Education.--Colleges and universities produce the leaders
    and skilled professionals needed to run modern societies, from the
    teachers who provide quality basic education to the public and private
    sector policymakers and managers who create strategies and policies for
    sustained growth and progress in every development area. Higher
    education institutions also work with business and government in
    solving complex problems, growing market economies, and developing
    sound policies that respond to local and national needs. Partnerships
    with U.S. colleges and universities can strengthen institutions of
    higher education in developing countries, promote research, and
    facilitate direct problem solving in areas such as agriculture, health,
    and education.
        An agricultural development partnership among Morocco, Israel, and
    San Diego State University not only strengthened both Morocco's and
    Israel's ability to export agricultural products, but also expanded the
    cooperative research efforts of Moroccan and Israeli participants,
    which directly contributes to the U.S. foreign policy goal of
    broadening regional cooperation in the Middle East. A mission of the
    Salesian Catholic order, a member of IETC, provides vocational training
    to orphans and poor youth in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The USAID-supported
    program offers courses ranging from mechanics to food preservation that
    address local job market demands. The 1,125 graduates to date not only
    earn more than the national average, but have gained the knowledge and
    skills required to participate in modern labor markets and citizenship.
        Training.--Often cited by beneficiaries as the most appreciated
    U.S. contribution to sustainable development, training expands a
    country's capacity to manage and monitor its own social and economic
    progress. Increasingly, U.S. development assistance is about training
    people rather than building physical infrastructure. Training can take
    place in the developing or transitional country, or in the United
    States where there is the significant advantage of direct access to
    U.S. expertise and experience. Training contributes to the formation of
    appropriate policies, the implementation of sound programs and
    practice, and long-term allegiances with U.S. professionals and
    institutions.
        Cutting across all development objectives, training is absolutely
    critical to sustainable and successful programs in education, health
    and population, democracy, economic growth and agriculture, and
    environmental protection. For example, IETC member Development
    Associates initially provided training to national legislators and key
    Ministry of Education officials of El Salvador. The training resulted
    in an Education Reform law that decentralized classroom instruction and
    expanded citizen involvement. Training was then provided to hundreds of
    teachers and community leaders, so that today there are 3,535
    functioning community school boards involving 27,000 citizens. One of
    the original trainees is now President of El Salvador.
        Information Technology.--Broad and equitable access to information
    is also essential to success in building human capacity as well as
    achieving USAID's other strategic goals. Now there is a heightened
    awareness of how timely, accurate, and relevant information can help
    make education and training more effective, strengthen or tear down
    political regimes, improve health care delivery and other social
    services, and build vibrant economies. For decades, USAID has applied
    distance learning approaches through radio and other broadcast media.
    The growing availability of computers and the Internet offers new
    opportunities for developing human capacity.
        USAID works to ensure that information technology benefits the
    poor. For example, through ``telemedicine'' applications, including in-
    service training for remote health care workers, quality health care is
    being extended to rural and isolated populations around the globe.
    Computer-assisted instruction in both rural and urban areas is helping
    to improve teacher training and enhance student motivation, retention,
    and learning.
                    u.s. support for education and training
        When U.S. funding for international development programs shrank by
    as much as 30 percent in the mid-1990s, education and training programs
    and staff were particularly hard hit. For example, Congress annually
    recommends that USAID target development assistance funds to basic
    education for children. In 1995, basic education was funded at $135
    million; in 1999, basic education was funded at $98 million. Training
    has shifted in emphasis to shorter-term technical training, resulting
    in a 40 percent decline in U.S-based training of developing country
    leaders. Moreover, funding for partnerships with U.S. institutions of
    higher education has declined in the 1990s.
        This erosion of U.S. leadership and capacity was recognized by
    USAID, Congress, and outside groups such as the International Education
    and Training Coalition. Along with other organizations that have long
    worked in the area of international education and training, the IETC
    understood how important these programs were to American interests
    abroad. Therefore, we have advocated for rebuilding support for public
    policy that makes international education and training a priority and
    for restoring resources to better match the tremendous needs in this
    area.
        At the urging of several members of Congress with long-standing
    interest in international education, in 1997 USAID agreed, to make a
    change in its strategic plan, adding ``Building Human Capacity through
    Education and Training'' as one of the six priority goals of the
    agency. USAID Administrator Brian Atwood stated that ``investments in
    people--in human capacity--will bring the most significant payoff over
    time.'' He committed the agency to taking full advantage of funding in
    basic education, particularly for girls, to expanding partnerships in
    higher education, and to using information technology to support
    development goals. He also emphasized the high value placed on training
    and committed the agency to greater consultation with its U.S.
    partners.
        IETC has welcomed and appreciated the expanded cooperation and
    consultation between USAID and outside organizations, which has
    resulted in numerous benefits, such as improved planning for education
    and training policy and programs. However, more needs to be done. The
    reaffirmation of education and training's role in promoting sustainable
    development has not been matched with adequate program funding or
    investments in qualified staff. Consistent leadership within the agency
    and Congress, as well as active engagement by all who believe in the
    importance of education and training, is needed to ensure that U.S.
    investments in education and training provide the tools for lifelong
    learning and point the way to a prosperous future for all.
        Specific ways the U.S. government can demonstrate support for
    international education and training include the following:
      --Increase funding for Human Capacity Development.--The
            Administration's fiscal year 2000 request for Foreign
            Operations Appropriations directs $148 million toward the goal
            of building human capacity, including $110 million for basic
            education for children and $38 million for other programs such
            as adult literacy, vocational training, and post-secondary
            education. The Coalition recommends a minimum of $162 million
            for human capacity development, including at least $120 million
            for basic education and at least $42 million for other
            education programs.
      --Ensure that training and information technology are integrated into
            USAID's overall development assistance agenda.--Development
            assistance is only effective and sustainable if the
            beneficiaries gain the knowledge and skills to solve their own
            development problems. Overseas missions must have adequate
            resources to effectively integrate training and information
            technology initiatives across the full range of development
            sectors, from health to democracy. U.S.-based training, which
            offers hands-on experience with American business practices and
            culture, remains an important tool for project success and
            sustainability.
      --Encourage USAID to hire and train staff with expertise in
            international education and training.--During the cuts to
            foreign aid in the mid-1990s, USAID lost one-third of its
            skilled education officers. Internal studies have indicated
            that the scarcity of qualified technical staff constrains the
            effectiveness and ability to expand education and training
            programs. In order for the U.S. to remain a leader in this
            area, the agency needs to invest adequate funds in skilled
            education and training staff.
      --Support USAID's Human Capacity Development Center.--The HCD Center
            is responsible for field support, technical leadership,
            research, and overall policy coordination on education and
            training. In fiscal year 1998--the same year USAID established
            a new goal for ``building human capacity''--funding for the HCD
            Center was cut from $12.4 million to $7.5 million. In fiscal
            year 1999 the level was increased slightly to approximately $9
            million. To ensure that the agency's activities can be
            supported and shared effectively, the HCD Center should be
            funded at a minimum level of $14 million.
        In conclusion, it is our hope that the new Congress and new
    Administrator of USAID will continue and strengthen their long-standing
    support so that the United States remains a leader in international
    education and training. Doing so will both promote American values and
    interests at home and improve the quality of life for millions of
    people around the world.
                 international education and training coalition
    Academy for Educational Development
    Africa-America Institute
    Africare
    Aguirre International, Inc.
    Alliance for International Educational and Cultural Exchange
    American Assembly of Collegiate Schools of Business
    American Association of Collegiate
    Registrars and Admissions Officers
    American Association of Community Colleges
    American Association of State Colleges and Universities
    American Council on Education
    American Councils for International Education
    American Federation of Teachers
    American Institutes for Research
    American Society for Training and Development
    American University of Beirut
    AMIDEAST
    Association for International Education Administrators
    Association for International Practical Training
    Association Liaison Office for University Cooperation in International
    Development
    Association of Professional Schools of International Affairs
    Aurora Associates International
    CEC International Partners
    Chemonics International Consulting Division
    CHP International, Inc.
    Coalition for American Leadership Abroad
    Comparative and International Education Society
    Council of Graduate Schools
    Council on International Educational Exchange
    CounterPart Foundation
    Creative Associates International
    Delphi International
    Development Associates, Inc.
    Development Infostructure, Inc.
    Education Development Center, Inc.
    Educational Testing Service
    Global Vision
    Howard University International Affairs Center
    Institute of International Education
    International Federation of Training and Development Organizations
    International Reading Association
    International Research and Exchanges Board
    Juarez and Associates
    LASPAU: Academic and Professional Programs for the Americas
    Management Systems International
    Meridian International Center
    Montana State University
    NAFSA: Association of International Educators
    National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities
    National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges
    National Council for International Visitors
    National Peace Corps Association
    Partners of the Americas
    Plan International, USA
    RESULTS Educational Fund
    Salesian Missions
    Save the Children
    Sister Cities International
    The Mitchell Group
    Winrock International
    Women's EDGE
    World Education
    World Education Services, Inc
    World Learning
    YMCA International
                                     ______

    Prepared Statement of Alexander F. Watson, Vice President and Executive
          Director, International Conservation, The Nature Conservancy
                                    summary
        The Nature Conservancy's mission is the protection of the plants
    and animals that make up the natural world, primarily through
    protection of their habitat. Our budget is approximately 92 percent
    from private sources. Our operations in the United States center on
    creating and running the world's largest system of private nature
    preserves. We also work in more than 30 foreign countries, in Latin
    America, the Caribbean, Canada, Asia, and the Pacific region. Overseas,
    we help local organizations improve the effective level of biodiversity
    protection, mainly in existing parks and protected areas, by
    strengthening local institutional capacities, building infrastructure,
    and engaging local people in community-based conservation. Since the
    beginning of our international program in 1981, we have helped protect
    more than 74 million acres at biologically significant sites in the
    Western Hemisphere alone, as well as critically important marine and
    forest sites in Pacific countries such as Indonesia and Papua New
    Guinea.
        It is increasingly apparent that the destruction of natural
    ecosystems can be a major threat to political and economic stability in
    the developing world, hence of concern not only to conservationists but
    to the broader populace. In the Conservancy's international program, we
    receive the support of the Agency for International Development (AID),
    which is the primary instrument through which the U.S. Government
    contributes to biodiversity conservation globally. The Conservancy's
    Parks in Peril (PiP) program, the flagship of our Latin American and
    Caribbean efforts, turns ``paper parks'' into genuinely protected areas
    with assistance from a multi-year cooperative agreement with AID. We
    are grateful for that help. Currently, while continuing to implement
    PiP, we are designing an improved program that we are calling ``PiP
    2000''. The core of that new program is projected to be our work at a
    number of large ``platform'' sites, from which we expect to influence
    conservation practices on a broader ``system'' level by national and
    private conservation authorities and groups in the countries where we
    work.
        AID's commitment to international conservation leverages resources
    from non-U.S. Government sources. For example, the $32.6 million that
    AID has invested in PiP since 1990 has been formally matched by more
    than $11.4 from The Nature Conservancy, local in-country partners, and
    governments, but that total greatly understates the real multiplier.
    Local partners and governments, helped by the expertise, credibility
    and ``brand-equity'' of the PiP program, have thus far attracted more
    than $180 million of non-AID commitments to conservation.
        This Committee has a record of recognizing the importance of
    defending biodiversity and approving funding for it. The Nature
    Conservancy appreciates these past endorsements, and urges that the
    Committee once again strongly support funding for Parks in Peril as
    well as the rest of AID's biodiversity programs in the fiscal year 2000
    appropriations process. In recent years, AID's worldwide biodiversity
    funding has typically totaled between $50 and $70 million annually; we
    recommend that it be continued at the high end of that range.
        We also endorse the proposed appropriations for two other items
    with great potential for international conservation. First, we strongly
    support full funding at the Administration's $50 million request level
    for the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, (TFCA), an innovative measure
    that emerged from a bipartisan consensus in the Congress last year.
    Assuming a reasonable leverage of between 2 and 3 dollars to one, debt
    reduction deals in fiscal year 2000 under the TFCA should mobilize
    between $100 million and $150 million in local currencies to protect
    tropical forests. Second, we endorse appropriation at the $143.333
    million request level for the Global Environment Facility (GEF).
    Projects to help protect biodiversity in developing countries are the
    largest single beneficiary of GEF grants. We have appended to this
    written statement some draft report language regarding PiP,
    biodiversity, the Tropical Forest Conservation Act, and the GEF, which
    we hope the Committee may find useful.
                         the importance of biodiversity
        The world's population depends on living natural resources and the
    maintenance of biodiversity for a multitude of economic and social
    benefits. According to the World Resources Institute, 4.5 percent of
    the U.S. Gross Domestic Product is due to economic benefits from wild
    species. Important U.S. industries rely heavily on biodiversity,
    including biotechnology, agriculture, and pharmaceuticals. One quarter
    to one third of all the prescriptions drugs in the U.S. contain
    compounds derived from wild species. One hundred and twenty
    prescription drugs currently come from about 95 species of plants; of
    these, 39 grow in tropical forests. Botanists believe that more than
    35,000 plant species (mostly native to tropical forests) provide
    traditional medicines to local peoples and, hence, are candidates for
    future pharmaceutical research. Modern agriculture also needs
    biodiversity: genetic diversity used in plant breeding accounted for
    about one-half of all the gains in agricultural yields in the U.S.
    between 1930 and 1980.
        The conservation of biodiversity is an issue everywhere, but it is
    especially critical in the poor countries. Here in the United States,
    and within the economically advanced countries more generally, many
    high-profile ``charismatic'' species have improved their status in
    recent decades. However, many other species have become endangered. In
    the United States, many species of freshwater fish, amphibians, clams
    and mollusks, and more than 100 species of birds, are at risk, but
    there is cause for optimism if we continue to work hard using private
    and public means. Conditions are much more challenging in the
    developing world, where the world's highest levels of species and
    habitat diversity are found. Local population growth, peasant land
    hunger, unchecked industrial pollution, and continued poverty are
    having disastrous effects on biodiversity. Many thousands of species of
    plants, insects, birds, fish, and mammals are being lost in what has
    been called the greatest mass extinction since the disappearance of the
    dinosaurs.
        These losses are of concern to us as conservationists. They must
    also be of concern to legislators and statesmen. The destruction of
    natural ecosystems in the developing world is now viewed widely as a
    major threat to political and economic stability. Economic development
    in poorer countries (and, ultimately, the health of much of our
    environment here) unquestionably is tied to the thoughtful conservation
    of natural resources.
        Coastal wetlands, mangrove forests and off-shore reefs, for
    example, are essential for healthy fish populations--and fish is
    currently the leading source of animal protein in the human diet
    worldwide. The U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service has calculated
    that destruction of U.S. coastal estuaries between 1954 and 1978 cost
    our country over $200 million annually from fisheries. Globally, the
    losses from damage to marine ecosystems are certainly much larger.
    Forests are also heavily threatened. Forests buffer heavy rains, help
    control flooding, retain water for gradual release, and reduce erosion
    of soil into waterways that provide drinking water, hydropower,
    irrigation and transportation to billions of people. Forests also help
    control carbon dioxide buildup in the atmosphere.
        The degradation of natural and biological resources often leads to
    poverty, hunger, disease and civil unrest. Massive shifts in population
    (both within and among countries) may occur when affected peoples
    migrate from areas that once were productive but now cannot support
    them. The social and political effects of natural resource depletion in
    developing countries can threaten the global security interests of the
    United States, imposing new burdens on our foreign policy and defense.
                  aid's commitment to biodiversity protection
        The Foreign Assistance Act states that the protection of tropical
    forests and biological diversity is a goal of U.S. foreign policy. AID
    is active in implementing this goal. Worldwide, its biodiversity
    conservation activities typically have totaled between $50 million and
    $70 million per year and reach more than 60 countries. AID's
    biodiversity programs focus on: developing sustainable economic uses of
    biological resources; building local capacity for the management of
    biologically diverse areas, including parks, protected areas and buffer
    zones; supporting innovative programs for non-governmental
    organizations in conservation and resource use; encouraging
    participation of stakeholders, including women, indigenous peoples, and
    local communities at every stage of decision making; and facilitating
    the setting of conservation priorities at the local, national and
    regional level.
        The Nature Conservancy strongly believes that the U.S. Government
    should continue to devote significant resources to the protection of
    biodiversity. Recently, AID's biodiversity funding has tended toward
    the lower end of its historic range of $50 to $70 million annually.
    This decline should be reversed, and programs should return to the $70
    million level.
                         the example of parks in peril
        AID increasingly looks to non-government organizations (NGO's) with
    strong scientific expertise and management experience for long-term
    cooperation to help achieve its biodiversity goals in a cost-effective
    manner. The Conservancy's Parks in Peril program (PiP) has been a model
    of such long-term cooperation. In recent decades, many nations of Latin
    America and the Caribbean took important initial steps to conserve
    their living resources by establishing protected area systems to
    safeguard critical watersheds, coastal and marine ecosystems, wildlife,
    and scenic and tourist attractions. Unfortunately, for lack of
    resources too many of these areas remained ``paper parks'' without
    effective protection. To address this serious problem, in fiscal year
    1990, AID began supporting our Parks in Peril program, a public-private
    partnership that seeks to protect the most threatened national parks
    and reserves in this hemisphere.
        Parks in Peril was designed to secure minimum critical management
    for a series of sites, transforming them into functional protected
    areas. Parks in Peril is administered by the Conservancy and its Latin
    American and Caribbean partners, under a series of multi-year
    cooperative agreements with the AID Bureau for Latin America and
    Caribbean (LAC). The program builds collaborative partnerships among
    national, international, public and private organizations. It has
    become the largest site-based biodiversity conservation project in the
    tropical world and has drawn wide support from other governmental and
    non-governmental constituencies in the region and around the globe.
        Parks in Peril works to build on-site protection and management
    infrastructure; integrate the protected areas with the human societies
    inhabiting their surrounding regions; create long-term funding and
    policy mechanisms to sustain the local management of the Parks in Peril
    sites; and use PiP's activities to influence conservation in other
    sites in the region's most imperiled ecosystems.
        AID and the Conservancy have designed a scorecard to measure how
    well particular sites meet these goals. As they do so, they are
    consolidated--that is, having achieved the program's original goals,
    they are phased out from receiving direct assistance from the
    centralized AID program. This transition to long-term sustainability
    has been from the outset a goal of the program. To date, AID LAC Bureau
    funds have supported conservation efforts at 36 PiP sites comprising
    over 24 million acres in 15 countries. Of those 36 sites, 17 have been
    consolidated. (The Conservancy also works at 27 additional PiP sites,
    totaling another 50-plus million acres.)
        PiP has provided exceptional leverage for the American taxpayer.
    The $32.6 million that PiP has received from AID since its inception in
    fiscal year 1990 was matched formally by more than $11.4 million from
    The Nature Conservancy, local in-country partners, and governments, but
    that total greatly understates the real multiplier. Local PiP partners
    and governments have thus far attracted more than $180 million of non-
    AID funding. This includes debt-for-nature swaps, carbon sequestration
    projects with major U.S. utility companies and partners in developing
    countries, grants from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and
    foreign governments including Japan, the Netherlands, and the European
    Union.
        PiP has worked to protect cloud forests, coral reefs, tropical
    forests, and savannas. PiP funding has supported efforts to demarcate
    critical boundaries; recruit, train and equip rangers and community
    extensionists; build protection infrastructure and provide
    transportation and communication technology; promote compatible
    natural-resource use in local communities; carry out baseline studies
    and biodiversity monitoring; and establish sources of long-term
    financing for reserve operations. At all PiP sites, local peoples'
    involvement is stressed, including measures to involve them in
    management decisions, creation of local opportunities for compatible
    resource uses and tangible economic benefits from the park. Parks will
    not survive ultimately unless local people value them and take pride in
    the their preservation. Parks in Peril is, thus, fundamentally
    different from one-time grant programs for park protection, and its
    methodology has become a model toward which the rest of the world is
    looking.
        Recently, we initiated discussions with AID about a draft plan for
    the next generation of Parks in Peril, which we are calling ``PiP
    2000.'' The approach is evolutionary, not revolutionary. We would
    remain true to our core methodologies and expertise of science-based
    conservation and working with local partners. However, as our knowledge
    of Western Hemisphere biodiversity and the threats to it has become
    more profound, we realize that hundreds of sites ultimately need some
    degree of conservation protection. Such protection need not preclude
    many forms of sustainable, compatible economic development at the
    sites. No program of assistance can possibly work at all these sites.
    So, our proposed strategy is to use ecoregional planning methodologies
    to select a relatively small number of ``platform'' sites, do excellent
    work there with local partners, and to emphasize leveraging the
    conservation practices at those sites to influence actions taken
    elsewhere by national parks authorities, NGO's, and private landowners.
    We are optimistic that PiP 2000 will prove even more successful and
    influential than the original Parks in Peril program has been.
        AID has also provided support to the Conservancy's Asia/Pacific
    conservation programs. We look forward to a continuation of such
    cooperation, particularly as regards Indonesia, which is second only to
    Brazil for biological diversity. We are hopeful that AID will support
    (through the new ``Global Program to Conserve Biological Diversity'' of
    AID's Global Bureau) an Asia/Pacific regional program to help protect
    the world's most extensive coral reefs.
    The Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998
        The Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998 (TFCA), a bipartisan
    Congressional initiative, was signed into law last July. It is based
    firmly on the precedents and administrative structure of the ``debt-
    for-environment'' provisions of the Bush Administration's Enterprise
    for the Americas Initiative (EAI). Under EAI, Western Hemisphere
    developing countries can pay, in local currency to national
    environmental and child survival funds, money that would otherwise have
    gone to pay some official debts. The debt reduction, swaps and buybacks
    to be carried out under provisions of the TFCA would operate under
    rules similar to EAI's, but would focus on tropical forest
    conservation. Furthermore, eligibility is extended to developing
    countries worldwide. The Nature Conservancy has strongly supported the
    TFCA since the idea was first proposed two years ago.
        The TFCA has great potential to boost tropical forest protection by
    creating long-term funds for on-the-ground action. The current status
    of the world's tropical forests is alarming. Scientific projections
    show that half of all the remaining tropical rain forests could
    disappear within 25 years. With them will disappear about 10 percent of
    all the species currently alive on the Earth. This has implications for
    the countries where the forests are located, and also for the people of
    the United States. More needs to be done. The Tropical Forest
    Conservation Act represents an investment by the American people in the
    survival of forests that have great economic and environmental value.
    This is the kind of sensible, results-oriented effort with staying-
    power that the Conservancy has promoted through the years. We stand
    ready to promote and cooperate with forest protection initiatives under
    the TFCA.
        We commend the Representatives and Senators who brought the TFCA
    forward and carried it to passage, the President for approving it, and
    the senior leaders within the Administration who have now, despite a
    difficult and complex budget environment, found room for the Act in the
    Administration's fiscal year 2000 budget proposal. The proposed
    appropriation of $50 million in fiscal year 2000 is below the
    authorized level of $125 million, but is still enough to have a truly
    significant impact on tropical forests in such critical countries as
    Brazil and Indonesia. The Act offers the possibility of good leverage--
    each dollar appropriated can generate a larger stream of payments in
    local currencies, normally in the range of 2 or 3 to one. We urge that
    the Committee appropriate the full request level of $50 million.
    Furthermore, we suggest that the Committee allow whichever U.S.
    Government agency implements the TFCA to keep a small amount (such as
    two percent) of the total appropriation to cover its management
    expenses.
    The Global Environment Facility (GEF)
        The Nature Conservancy supports the proposed appropriation of
    $143.33 million to the GEF--enough, if approved, to fund the current
    U.S. pledge level of $107.5 million and pay down the United States'
    arrears by $35.833 million. The GEF, with 120 members, is an essential
    financial mechanism. There is just no substitute for the GEF in dealing
    with the major global environmental issues. The U.S. share leverages
    grants from many other countries. The GEF has committed more than $2
    billion for over 200 large projects, plus more than 300 smaller
    projects funded through its successful Small Grants Program and its new
    Medium Sized (up to $750,000) Grants Program.
        Thirty-eight percent of total GEF funds have gone to support and
    conserve biodiversity. For example, GEF's Coral Reef Rehabilitation and
    Management (COREMAP) program in Indonesia is helping to protect key
    reef fisheries that millions of Indonesians depend upon for food and
    livelihood--helping to promote economic development and greater
    stability in that country, while protecting the coral reef ecosystems.
    Another GEF project is helping to stabilize populations of the Javan
    and Sumatran rhinos, in Indonesia and Malaysia. GEF's South Pacific
    biodiversity project has identified and helped establish 14
    conservation areas in 11 countries. Trust accounts have been
    established with funds from income-generating activities. The project
    launched a regional ``year of the sea turtle'' campaign which resulted
    in a four-year moratorium on commercial harvesting of sea turtles in
    Fiji, and helped develop a whale-watching industry in Tonga. In Central
    America, eight countries (Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala,
    Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, and Panama) are participating in the GEF-
    funded regional program for the consolidation of the Meso-American
    biological corridor--a proposed network of protected areas and buffer
    zones to be linked by biological corridors with a variety of uses and
    degrees of protection. These are some examples of GEF's importance to
    conservation in developing countries. There are many more. We urge the
    Committee to fund GEF at the request level.
        As we have done in past years, we have appended to this written
    statement some draft report language, which we hope the Committee may
    find useful in its work.
        Thank you for this opportunity to submit The Nature Conservancy's
    views on foreign assistance and international conservation.
    appendix to testimony by the nature conservancy: suggested language for
               fiscal year 2000 senate foreign operations report
    Parks in peril
        The Committee notes its strong support for the existing AID Parks
    in Peril program, a partnership with the private sector to promote
    biodiversity conservation in imperiled ecosystems throughout Latin
    America and the Caribbean. AID/Parks in Peril has worked at 36 sites in
    15 different countries, comprising more than 24 million acres. It has
    made significant progress at turning ``paper parks'' into genuine
    protected areas, to the extent that 17 sites have been ``consolidated''
    from the program; central AID funding is being phased out to those
    sites, and the program is shifting its successful methodology to new
    locations. Since its inception, Parks in Peril has received $32.6
    million from central AID funds, formally matched by more than $11.4
    million from The Nature Conservancy, foreign partners, and foreign
    governments, and has indirectly leveraged more than $180 million from
    non-AID sources. The Committee welcomes the prospect of ``PiP 2000'', a
    renewed program that seeks to extend the influence of PiP more broadly.
    Tropical Forest Conservation Act of 1998
        The Committee welcomes the Administration's decision to seek $50
    million to begin debt reductions under the Tropical Forest Conservation
    Act, which has the potential to be a significant, cost-effective means
    for protecting important tropical forests. The Committee recommends
    that whichever U.S. Government agency implements the TFCA be allowed to
    keep two percent of the total appropriation to cover its management
    expenses.
    AID's support to conserving biodiversity
        The Committee has repeatedly urged that AID make biodiversity a
    higher priority. The Committee welcomes the initiation of the Global
    Program to Conserve Biological Diversity. The Committee strongly
    supports a reversal of recent declines in AID funding for biodiversity
    conservation, and a return to historical levels of ca. $70 million per
    year. Such activities should continue to emphasize the use of non-
    government organizations (NGO's) through cooperative agreements and
    other innovative, cost-effective financing vehicles.
    Global environment facility
        The Committee believes that the GEF should play an essential role
    in addressing global environmental problems. The Committee further
    notes that, in many developing countries, NGO's have superior capacity
    and expertise to implement biodiversity conservation projects, and
    therefore the U.S. should continue to press for improved access for
    NGO's to GEF funding, such as through active implementation and funding
    of its Medium-Sized Grants window with simplified application and
    accounting procedures.
                                     ______

       Prepared Statement of the American Lung Association, the American
    Thoracic Society, and International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung
                                    Disease
        The American Lung Association (ALA) and its medical section, the
    American Thoracic Society (ATS), appreciate the opportunity to provide
    written comments to the Senate Foreign Operation Appropriations
    Subcommittee. The ALA/ATS in cooperation with our international
    partner, the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease
    (the Union), have a long history of activity on domestic and global TB
    control. We hope our comments will be of use as the subcommittee
    considers funding priorities for the fiscal year 2000 budget.
        The comments of the American Lung Association and the American
    Thoracic Society focus on the global impact of tuberculosis and the
    role of the U.S. Agency for International Development in TB prevention
    and control.
        Even though TB is an easily preventable and 100 percent curable
    disease, it has become the leading infectious killer in the world,
    accounting for more than 3 million deaths per year.
      --More than one third of the world's population is infected with TB.
      --TB is the leading killer of women, surpassing all causes of
            maternal mortality.
      --TB creates more orphaned children than any other infectious
            disease.
      --TB is the leading killer of HIV-positive individuals, causing over
            30 percent of AIDS deaths.
      --TB already kills more people than AIDS, malaria and tropical
            diseases combined.
      --As the number of TB cases has increased, a multi-drug resistant
            form has emerged that poses a major public health threat in the
            U.S. and around the world--in fact, this development, left
            unchecked, threatens to make TB incurable again.
      --The resurgence of TB that began in the U.S. in 1985 has finally
            begun to slow with the implementation of effective control
            strategies. However, with the increase in global travel and
            migration, we will not control TB in the U.S. unless we control
            it worldwide.
        There are big challenges in tackling the global TB epidemic, but
    because of action taken by the House and Senate Foreign Operations
    Subcommittees, progress is being made. As a direct result of committee
    action over the last two years to fund a new Emerging and Re-emerging
    Infectious Disease Initiative, some very positive steps have been taken
    to control the spread of TB. ALA/ATS and the Union are pleased with
    USAID's response to this new initiative. We also want you to know that
    the agency has had an open dialogue with key governmental,
    intergovernmental and NGO's in drafting their TB control strategy.
        The ALA/ATS and the Union have helped spearhead much of the
    dialogue among the many essential partners involved, and we look
    forward to continuing to work with you and USAID on this vital global
    health concern.
        Developing countries are hardest hit by this disease, sub-Saharan
    Africa and Southeast Asia in particular. There, tuberculosis is
    concentrated in the most economically productive age groups, people who
    are between the ages of 15 and 59. Tuberculosis is the leading cause of
    disability adjusted life years lost among men ages 45-59 (the most
    economically productive age group) and the second leading cause among
    men and women ages 15-44. So, not only is tuberculosis a health problem
    in these countries, it is also an economic problem. These countries are
    losing their most productive workers to an easily preventable and
    completely curable disease.
        Despite the highly effective treatments of tuberculosis that are
    available, only about one-half of the people in the world with
    tuberculosis are receiving any treatment. Developing nations have
    inadequate programs for the diagnosis of active tuberculosis, treating
    cases only when individuals are symptomatic and present themselves for
    care. Of those who seek treatment, fewer than half complete treatment.
    Thus less than a quarter of the individuals with active tuberculosis
    complete treatment. Low treatment rates mean that TB is still being
    spread unchecked. This also contributes to the emergence of drug-
    resistant tuberculosis, a dangerous and ominous prospect.
        Another factor with a substantial impact on the increasing case
    rate numbers in developing countries, especially in sub-Saharan
    nations, is infection with HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. An
    estimated \1/3\ of the world's 31 million HIV positive people are also
    infected with TB. The immune suppressing nature of HIV makes its
    carriers especially vulnerable to developing tuberculosis and has all
    but eliminated 30 years of progress in the fight against tuberculosis
    in nations most affected. While the overall number of HIV-TB infected
    individuals is overwhelming by itself, the impact of this dual
    infection has devastated tuberculosis control programs. Within a five-
    year period, the annual cases of tuberculosis in Zambia nearly tripled,
    in Malawi more than doubled and in Burundi increased by about 40
    percent.
        As mentioned earlier, another significant problem is the emergence
    of drug-resistant tuberculosis. Multi-drug resistant or MDR-TB occurs
    when a strain of the TB bacterium becomes resistant to two or more of
    the drugs used to treat TB. TB bacteria develop resistance to drugs as
    a result of incomplete and improper treatment. People with MDR-TB
    spread MDR-TB to others.
        In some countries there is already a concern that the drug-
    resistant tuberculosis strains have become so common that they may soon
    replace drug susceptible strains as the main disease cause. It is
    estimated that globally 50 million people have a TB strain resistant to
    at least one TB drug.
        In the U.S., 1996 was marked by sporadic outbreaks of drug-
    resistant TB. Sporadic cases of ``Strain W.'' a deadly TB strain
    resistant to the best anti-TB drugs, originally reported in New York,
    New Jersey and Florida have now been found in South Carolina, North
    Carolina, Maryland, Colorado, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada,
    California and Puerto Rico. The strain ``W'' TB bacterium is resistant
    to 8 of the best TB drugs. Strain ``W'' has a mortality rate of 90
    percent. Globally, there are already some strains of the TB bacterium
    that do not appear to respond to any of the current arsenal of anti-TB
    drugs.
        Drug-resistant TB has grown as a global problem despite the well
    known fact that its spread can be limited by of a short course therapy,
    supervision of DOT or directly observed therapy, and use of adequate
    treatment regimens. For example, in 1990 in the Republic of Korea,
    following implementation of such measures, the overall prevalence of
    drug-resistant tuberculosis decreased to 25 percent from 48 percent in
    1980, and primary resistance in patients who had no prior TB treatment
    fell by 50 percent. In China, a World Bank funded program of DOT has
    dramatically reduced treatment failure and drug resistance in just a
    few years.
        This worldwide tuberculosis crisis has important implications for
    the U.S. International travel and migration have created, if not a
    global village, a global bus station were both people and microbes mix
    and spread. In the U.S., over 35 percent of all tuberculosis cases
    occur in foreign born individuals, a figure that has increased more
    than doubled since 1985. In addition, each year--tens of millions of
    foreign visitors come legally to the U.S. A recently publicized
    incident of a Korean tourist spreading multi-drug-resistant
    tuberculosis to a child in suburban Washington underscores the
    significance of this issue. Borders cannot be closed to tuberculosis,
    either through mandatory testing or exclusion of tourists from selected
    areas. The only rational and cost effective approach to this problem is
    to contribute to the global control of tuberculosis.
        TB Control is Cost Effective.--While the facts present a grim
    picture, the reality is that TB is not only preventable and curable--TB
    control is cost-effective. The World Bank has determined that modern TB
    treatments are among the most cost-effective health interventions
    available today--comparable to that of childhood immunizations. For
    every dollar of tuberculosis prevention and control funds spent, a
    nation saves an estimated $3 to $4. This savings is even greater when
    compared to the cost of treating multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis.
        The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease (the
    American Lung Association represents the U.S. in this international NGO
    of 120 member countries) has developed an effective program combining
    technical and financial assistance for developing nations that results
    in TB cure rates of over 80 percent. These programs combine the use of
    modern short course chemotherapy using three of the first line
    tuberculosis drugs; development and provision of training courses and
    material for health personnel; and research. It is key that programs
    have been developed to take into account the less than ideal
    circumstances existing in most developing countries and are designed to
    work even in the most poorly developed health service systems.
        The Only Thing Worse than NO TB Control Program is a BAD TB Control
    Program.--To effectively eliminate the global TB threat it is critical
    to put in place a well-coordinated and adequately funded global effort.
    If poorly-planned, poorly-managed and under-funded programs are put in
    place there is considerable risk that more widespread multi-drug
    resistant TB will emerge--a virtual health and economic ticking time
    bomb.
        We are pleased to report that USAID has funded a global planning
    process that will help insure that this reality is not realized. This
    process will develop the framework by which countries, international
    financial institutions, NGO's and individual TB experts can most
    efficiently and effectively attack this problem.
        Global Health Experts Estimate over $1 Billion is Needed to Control
    TB.--Over the last several years global health experts have determined
    that in order to control TB, efforts must begin in the countries with
    the highest incidence. A conservative estimate of the cost of this type
    of effort tops $1 Billion.
                                recommendations
        Provide a TB specific appropriation in the amount of $60 million
    for fiscal year 2000.--Major barriers to effective TB control programs
    exist in virtually all of the high incidence countries, including lack
    of funds, trained personnel and drug supply. The unique circumstances
    of each country require the development and implementation of country
    specific programs.
        Of the $100 million you provided USAID for the Infectious Diseases
    Initiative, some $24 million has been targeted for TB activities. While
    this has provided a good start, and has helped to begin a truly global
    response, much more needs to be done.
        The additional $60 million would allow USAID to:
        1. Continue to support for the United States Agency for
    International Development (USAID) to develop an integrated global
    tuberculosis control program in consultation with the Center for
    Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Institutes of Health
    (NIH), the World Health Organization (WHO) and private voluntary
    organizations.
        2. Significantly expand funding to develop and implement country
    specific plans for tuberculosis control programs for nations with a
    high prevalence of tuberculosis.
        3. Continue support for an international surveillance network to
    monitor tuberculosis.
        4. Continue support for training of TB control experts with the
    Fogarty International Center at the NIH.
        The American Lung Association, the American Thoracic Society and
    our international partner, the International Union Against Tuberculosis
    and Lung Disease, thank you for the support the Committee has shown for
    efforts to attack this global health problem. With continued support we
    are confident that the world community will respond to the leadership
    of the United States and we will show great progress in our battle to
    control this disease.
        The International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, the
    American Lung Association, and its medical section, the American
    Thoracic Society, are committed to the elimination of tuberculosis. But
    we cannot succeed without the firm, unwavering commitment from the
    federal government. Thank you for this opportunity to comment.

           LIST OF WITNESSES, COMMUNICATIONS, AND PREPARED STATEMENTS

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Albright, Hon. Madeleine K., Secretary of State, Office of the
      Secretary, Department of State.................................   181
        Prepared statement...........................................   189
        Summary statement............................................   184
    American:
        Lung Association, prepared statement.........................   284
        Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, prepared statement.   252
        Thoracic Society, prepared statement.........................   284
    Aossey, Nancy A., President and CEO, International Medical Corps,
      prepared statement.............................................    43
    Atwood, Hon. J. Brian, Administrator, Agency for International
      Develop-
      ment...........................................................   101
        Prepared statement...........................................   107
        Summary statement............................................   103

    Bennett, Hon. Robert F., U.S. Senator from Utah, opening
      statement......................................................   128
    Bond, Hon., Christopher S., U.S. Senator from Missouri:
        Prepared statement...........................................    54
        Questions submitted by.......................................    76
    Burkhalter, Holly, Advocacy Director, Physicians for Human Rights    31
        Prepared statement...........................................    38
    Bye, Dr. Raymond E., Jr., Interim Vice President for Research,
      Florida State University, prepared statement...................   248

    Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse, U.S. Senator from Colorado:
        Opening statement............................................   123
        Questions submitted by.......................................    78
    Campuzano, Diana, survivor of Israeli bombing, New York, NY......    91
    Craig, Hon. Larry, U.S. Senator from Idaho, questions submitted
      by.............................................................   145
    Crow, Michael M., Executive Vice Provost, Columbia University,
      prepared statement.............................................   233

    Dickinson, Timothy L., Immediate-Past Chair, Section of
      International Law and Practice, prepared statement.............   228

    Eisenfeld, Vicki, mother of Matthew Eisenfeld, West Hartford, CT.    87
        Prepared statement...........................................    89

    Faith Action for People-Centered Development Policy, prepared
      statement......................................................   221
    Feinstein, Hon. Dianne, U.S. Senator from California, prepared
      statement......................................................     7
    Feldman, Dr. Lawrence A., Acting Senior Vice President for
      Academic Affairs, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New
      Jersey, prepared statement.....................................   243
    Flatow, Stephen M., prepared statement...........................    81

    Inderfurth, Hon. Karl F., Assistant Secretary for South Asian
      Affairs, Department of State...................................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................    12
        Summary statement............................................     8
    Indyk, Hon. Martin S., Assistant Secretary of State for Near
      Eastern Affairs, Department of State...........................    51
    International:
        Education and Training Coalition, prepared statement.........   274
        Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, prepared
          statement..................................................   284

    Jollivette, Cyrus M., Vice President for Government Relations,
      prepared statement.............................................   249

    Kohl, Hon. Herb, U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, questions submitted
      by.............................................................   146

    Lautenberg, Hon. Frank R., U.S. Senator from New Jersey:
        Opening statements

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Prepared statements repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    e Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Questions submitted by repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the
    Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the
    Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the
    Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Leahy, Hon. Patrick J., U.S. Senator from Vermont: Opening statements

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the
    Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    e Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Prepared statements  Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury,
    Office of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    0235

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    0235

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the
    Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    e Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    0235

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Questions submitted by repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    0235

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    ce of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the
    Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Leno, Mavis, National Board Member, Feminist Majority Foundation, prepared
    statement............................................. 31Lewin, Nathan,
    attorney, Washington, District of Columbia........ 82 Prepared
    statement........................................... 84Manoff, Dr. Rob,
    prepared statement.............................. 239McConnell, Hon. Mitch,
    U.S. Senator from Kentucky: Opening statements repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    e Treasury, Office of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Prepared statements 0235

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    0235

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Mikulski, Hon. Barbara A., U.S. Senator from Maryland, opening statements
    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    repared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    ce of the Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    the Pan Karpathian Educational Progressive Association, prepared statement

    255____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary Foundation of Rotary International, prepared statement

    238____________________________________________________________________

    Rotary International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    t

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

    International, prepared statement

    235____________________________________________________________________

    Rubin, Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the Secretary,
    Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

     Hon. Robert E., Secretary of the Treasury, Office of the
    Secretary, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    153____________________________________________________________________

    Summary statement

    151____________________________________________________________________

    Schuerch, Hon. William, Deputy Assistant Secretary for International
    Development, Debt and Environmental Policy, Department of the Treasury

    149____________________________________________________________________

    Specter, Hon. Arlen, U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania:

    Opening statements

    52, 206________________________________________________________________

    Questions submitted by

    146____________________________________________________________________

    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ

    79_____________________________________________________________________

    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement

    134____________________________________________________________________

    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees, and
    Migration, Department of State

    1______________________________________________________________________

    Prepared statement

    19_____________________________________________________________________

        Questions submitted by.......................................   146
    Stephen Flatow, father of Alisa Flatow, West Orange, NJ..........    79
    Stevens, Hon. Ted, U.S. Senator from Alaska, opening statement...   134
    Taft, Hon. Julia, Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees,
      and Migration, Department of State.............................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................    19
        Summary statement............................................    16

    Watson, Alexander F., Vice President and Executive Director,
      International Conservation, The Nature Conservancy, prepared
      statement......................................................   279

                                 SUBJECT INDEX

                                  ----------

                      AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT

                                                                       Page

    Additional committee questions...................................   139
    Agriculture......................................................   143
    Assistance programs, unfunded....................................   144
    Berenson, Lori...................................................   144
    Blindness........................................................   142
    Carelift international...........................................   146
    Collaborative Agri-Business Assistance Program (CASP)............   145
    Cuba.............................................................   144
    East European Democracy Account, support for.....................   112
    Economic Support Fund Account....................................   114
    FREEDOM Support Act Account......................................   112
    HIV-AIDS.........................................................   140
        Children affected by.........................................   141
        Microbicides.................................................   141
    Humanitarian Food Assistance.....................................   146
    Infectious disease surveillance..................................   139
    International Disaster Assistance Account........................   113
    Israel and the Palestinians, WYE aid for.........................   145
    Maternal health..................................................   143
    New Management System (NMS) and Y2K..............................   115
    Offsets in Central America supplemental..........................   145
    Operating expenses...............................................   114
    Policy based on polls............................................   131
    Refugees.........................................................   117
    Regional programs................................................   112
    Results Act......................................................   116
    Security.........................................................   116
    Sustainable Development Assistance...............................   109
    USAID contract costs--overhead rates.............................   142
        Credit programs..............................................   113

                             DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

    Indictments......................................................    72
    Information sources..............................................    56
    Investigative priorities.........................................    76
    Joint investigations.............................................    57
    Terrorist attacks, investigation of..............................    56

                              DEPARTMENT OF STATE

    Additional committee questions...................................    76
    Economics and politics in the Middle East, confluence of.........    64
    Israel...........................................................    66
    Israeli and Palestinian cooperation..............................    71
    Jordan...........................................................    65
    Offsets..........................................................    68
    Palestinians.....................................................    67
        Security performance.........................................    67
    Wye:
        Package, overview of.........................................    65
        Supplemental.................................................    64

                         Office of South Asian Affairs

    Afghanistan today: The U.S. response.............................    12
    Expectations for 1999............................................    23
    Humanitarian situation in Afghanistan............................    21
    Laden, Osama Bin, strike against.................................    23
    Refugees in:
        Iran.........................................................    20
        Pakistan.....................................................    20
    USG assistance...................................................    23

                            Office of the Secretary

    Additional committee questions...................................   212
    American leadership around the world.............................   190
    East Timor.......................................................   216
    Family planning assistance.......................................   217
    Funds available for the 150 account..............................   202
    Global opportunities and threats.................................   197
    HIV/AIDS.........................................................   213
    Humanitarian assistance, providing...............................   201
    Iraq humanitarian situation......................................   212
    Israel:
        Aid to.......................................................   216
        And the Palestinians, Wye aid package for....................   216
    Kosovars in the peace process....................................   219
    Kosovas, preventing future.......................................   218
    Milosevic is not a partner.......................................   217
    NATO unity of command, no partition..............................   217
    Rwanda...........................................................   213
    Turkish helicopters..............................................   214
    United Nations...................................................   215
    U.S.:
        Assistance to Colombia.......................................   214
        Foreign operations budget....................................   189
    War criminals, aid to Bosnian entities harboring.................   218
    Wye supplemental.................................................   213

                           DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

                            Office of the Secretary

    Additional committee questions...................................   172
    Global Environment Facility......................................   174
        Offset in supplemental bill..................................   180
    Indonesia--Standards for Disbursement of Funds Between the IFIs..   168
    Middle East Development Bank.....................................   172
    North American Development Bank..................................   172
    Poorest countries, ending the debt cycle of......................   176
    Southeast Europe:
        Aid for integration of.......................................   178
        War in.......................................................   155
    Tibet............................................................   172
    Treasury advisers program........................................   179
    Tropical forest countries, debt relief for.......................   175
    World Bank and other (MDBS):
        Management reform at.........................................   177
        Proliferation of.............................................   176

                                       -