[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

                                   -