[House Hearing, 115 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
AMERICA'S INTERESTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST AND
NORTH AFRICA: THE PRESIDENT'S
FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
THE MIDDLE EAST AND NORTH AFRICA
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JULY 13, 2017
__________
Serial No. 115-54
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/
or
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
26-225 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, gpo@custhelp.com
COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS
EDWARD R. ROYCE, California, Chairman
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida BRAD SHERMAN, California
DANA ROHRABACHER, California GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOE WILSON, South Carolina GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
MICHAEL T. McCAUL, Texas THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
TED POE, Texas KAREN BASS, California
DARRELL E. ISSA, California WILLIAM R. KEATING, Massachusetts
TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island
JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina AMI BERA, California
MO BROOKS, Alabama LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
PAUL COOK, California TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania JOAQUIN CASTRO, Texas
RON DeSANTIS, Florida ROBIN L. KELLY, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
TED S. YOHO, Florida DINA TITUS, Nevada
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois NORMA J. TORRES, California
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois
DANIEL M. DONOVAN, Jr., New York THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York
F. JAMES SENSENBRENNER, Jr., ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
Wisconsin TED LIEU, California
ANN WAGNER, Missouri
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida
FRANCIS ROONEY, Florida
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
THOMAS A. GARRETT, Jr., Virginia
Amy Porter, Chief of Staff Thomas Sheehy, Staff Director
Jason Steinbaum, Democratic Staff Director
------
Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman
STEVE CHABOT, Ohio THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida
DARRELL E. ISSA, California GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia
RON DeSANTIS, Florida DAVID N. CICILLINE, Rhode Island
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
PAUL COOK, California BRENDAN F. BOYLE, Pennsylvania
ADAM KINZINGER, Illinois TULSI GABBARD, Hawaii
LEE M. ZELDIN, New York BRADLEY SCOTT SCHNEIDER, Illinois
DANIEL M. DONOVAN, Jr., New York THOMAS R. SUOZZI, New York
ANN WAGNER, Missouri TED LIEU, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
WITNESSES
The Honorable Stuart Jones, Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of
Near Eastern Affairs, U.S. Department of State................. 22
Ms. Maria Longi, Acting Assistant Administrator, Bureau for the
Middle East, U.S. Agency for International Development......... 24
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
The Honorable Stuart Jones: Prepared statement................... 8
Ms. Maria Longi: Prepared statement.............................. 14
APPENDIX
Hearing notice................................................... 34
Hearing minutes.................................................. 35
The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly, a Representative in Congress
from the Commonwealth of Virginia: Prepared statement.......... 36
Questions submitted for the record by the Honorable Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Middle East and
North Africa, and written responses from:
The Honorable Stuart Jones..................................... 38
Ms. Maria Longi................................................ 42
AMERICA'S INTERESTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST
AND NORTH AFRICA: THE PRESIDENT'S
FY 2018 BUDGET REQUEST
----------
THURSDAY, JULY 13, 2017
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa,
Committee on Foreign Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:00 p.m., in
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Ileana Ros-
Lehtinen (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. The subcommittee will come to order.
After recognizing myself and Ranking Member Deutch for 5
minutes each for our opening statements, I will then recognize
other members seeking recognition for 1 minute. We will then
hear from our witnesses. Without objection, your prepared
statements will be made a part of the record, and members may
have 5 days to insert statements and questions for the record,
subject to the length limitation in the rules.
The Chair now recognizes herself for 5 minutes.
Today we are here to discuss the President's budget request
for the upcoming Fiscal Year 2018 for the Middle East and North
Africa region. While I have always been an advocate of being
efficient and effective in the use of taxpayer debt, American
taxpayer dollars to fund our foreign assistance programs, I
believe we have many good programs that should not be cut just
for the sake of scaling back.
To be sure, there has been plenty of waste, fraud, and
abuse that needs to be addressed, but those should be addressed
specifically, not simply by an across-the-board cut. But let us
start with some of the positives.
The current request represents $3.1 billion in foreign
military financing, FMF assistance for our closest friend and
ally, the Democratic Jewish State of Israel. This level is
consistent with previous obligations and represents a final
year of the previous 10-year Memorandum of Understanding, MOU,
between the U.S. and Israel. We need to honor our obligations
and guarantee that Israel is able to maintain its qualitative
military edge, QME, over its neighbors.
I am also pleased to see that the budget request honors the
commitments we made to our ally, the Hashemite Kingdom of
Jordan, under the current MOU between our two countries. Jordan
remains a vital partner in the fight against ISIS, and its
stability and security are top priorities for the region, for
our ally Israel, and for the United States. This will be the
final year of the current MOU. And I have offered a bill
alongside Ted Deutch, Nita Lowey, and Hal Rogers that would
authorize a new and expanded MOU for Jordan to ensure that the
king can keep his country safe, continue fighting ISIS
alongside us, and expand his economy.
I strongly suggest for State to adequately address Jordan's
economic and security needs as it examines the new MOU, which
hopefully will be for 5 years, in order to reaffirm our long-
term commitment to the Hashemite Kingdom.
I am also happy to see that the request for Israel's (sic)
economic assistance has been reduced, not because I think Egypt
doesn't need any economic assistance--of course it does--but
because we still have a considerable pipeline of unobligated
money in the hundreds of millions of dollars from previous
years that we have yet to spend. I see no reason to continue to
ask taxpayers to add to that pipeline until we can clear out
that backlog. And if that money cannot go out the door in Egypt
for whatever reason, then perhaps U.S. interests would be best
served if it was reprogrammed elsewhere.
And by elsewhere I suggest Tunisia, which brings us to the
bad in this budget request. First, I'm extremely disappointed
to see a request for continued assistance for the Palestinian
Authority. I know we will hear how none of this money goes
directly to the Palestinian Authority or that a lot of this
money actually goes to Israel to pay off the PA debt, and that
we are going--that we are doing important humanitarian
assistance in the West Bank and Gaza. But we all know that
money is fungible. For every dollar of PA debt to Israel that
we pay, that frees more funds for Abu Mazen to pay the salaries
of terrorists.
And it means that even though we continue to find that the
P.A. and the PLO have not lived up to their obligations, they
continue to incite violence, and they continue to support
terror, and they continue to work against the interests of the
Palestinian people. Rather than holding them accountable, we
are rewarding them with continued U.S. assistance.
Another disappointment in the budget request is for
Tunisia. Tunisia has been one of the very few positive
developments in the region over the past few years. It's not
without problems, of course, but any country going through a
transition like Tunisia in an earnest effort to become a
democratic society is going to have some hurdles to overcome.
Now is not the time to cut and run, now is the time to double
down on Tunisia that is at the forefront of fighting terrorism,
as it has to deal with the problem of foreign fighters coming
from Tunisia.
This year's request seriously undermines Tunisia's economic
progress, and it completely cuts out all FMF assistance to a
country whose security and stability are vital as it struggles
to stay on a path toward democratic governance. Tunisia is not
the only country that lost its FMF assistance under this
request, which calls into question the dramatic shifts the
administration has taken in the FMF program itself.
I hope we hear more about this global FMF fund, which I
believe is something like $200 million for everyone, and how
the administration plans on distributing that and its plans for
moving to loans rather than grants. I worry this may be a move
by the administration to remove the State Department and,
therefore, our Foreign Affairs Committee out of the foreign
military sales realm by cutting FMF, yet making these countries
eligible to receive Defense Department-funded security
assistance.
And though this is not a part of the budget request, this
also calls into question the State Department's role in the
Saudi counterterror center. And with Secretary Tillerson in the
region at the moment, and with the announcement out of this
Riyadh Summit, it raises questions regarding the agreements we
just signed with Qatar, and how we will fund our commitments.
There are also many questions that this budget request conjures
up. And I have great concern with many aspects of it and how
this budget will promote America's interests and help raise
stability and security to the region.
And with that, I am pleased to yield to the ranking member,
my friend Mr. Deutch.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Thanks to Ambassador
Jones and Ms. Longi for being here today to discuss the
administration's proposed FY 2018 budget.
Ambassador Jones, I especially want to thank you for your
distinguished career serving this country in some of the most
challenging environments. And while we wish you well in your
retirement, which I understand is coming in just a few short
weeks, this country is losing a great diplomat and we are
grateful for all that you have provided to us.
Let me say that we appreciate the relationship that we have
had with your respective bureaus. We hope we will continue to
work together to address the very real challenges facing the
Middle East and North Africa. And I want to commend the
remarkable Foreign Service and career personnel serving at both
State and USAID. We are fortunate to have tremendously talented
people who are willing to dedicate their lives to public
service, often in dangerous conditions. And we are grateful for
that service.
That said, I am deeply concerned that senior level
positions at both State and USAID have yet to be filled. I am
concerned that while both of you are extraordinarily capable of
doing your job, you are still filling an acting role 7 months
into this administration. And I continue to read articles that
refer to no one being home at the State Department. That is not
a good message for our friends. It is not a good message for
our allies. And it is a terrible message to send to our
adversaries around the world.
Diplomacy and development should be driving our foreign
policy decisions, not taking a back seat to whatever decision
the President cedes to the Defense Department. State and DoD
should be working hand-in-hand to craft consistent policy
messages that are amplified coherently across the entire
government. And I just don't see how this budget request in any
way prioritizes either diplomacy or development.
When the Pentagon receives a $54 billion increase and the
State Department receives a 32 percent decrease, I have a hard
time hearing the argument that this is about efficiency and
saving money for the taxpayers. The budget for the Middle East
and North Africa is by far the largest of the regional funds.
And the Trump administration is proposing an 11 percent cut in
bilateral aid to the Middle East and North Africa over the FY
2016 enacted levels. Most of these cuts are coming from our
foreign military financing.
The proposed restructuring of our FMF into one $200 million
global fund that might be in the form of grants or might be in
the form of loans is one of the most perplexing things about
this budget proposal. I can't quite understand why we would
pull this critical security assistance from countries
desperately in need of it, like Tunisia and Lebanon. I don't
understand what kind of message it sends when we tell a country
that is our partner in the fight against terrorism that instead
of a dedicated funding stream we are going to somehow figure
out who will get or how much they get from this new global pot
of money.
I am also concerned that converting grants to loans will
prevent poor countries from getting the assistance they need to
protect their and our interests. So I would like to better
understand how you envision the decisions related to the global
FMF fund that you made, how the priorities will be decided, who
gets what, and what are we telling our allies who have been the
recipients of these grants.
I understand that budget numbers can be deceiving when it
comes to pipelines and funding streams and allocations of prior
year funds, but this proposal in no way seems to reflect the
serious challenges that the region faces. Egypt, which has
hundreds of millions of dollars sitting in the pipeline because
we have a fundamental difference with the Egyptians on how
economic support funds should be used, is still receiving $75
million in economic support funds.
Where is the money going to be used, particularly after the
government's decision to sign the restrictive new NGO law?
How do these budget cuts reflect the need to bring
stability or relief to Libya, and Syria, and Iraq, and Yemen
while continuing to push for a political solution to those
conflicts. We should be pursuing robust programs that
strengthen these countries and their people so they can resist
extremist elements.
How will the budget help to shore up Jordan, one of our
most reliable partners in the fight against ISIS, whose economy
is in terrible shape? The chairman and I continue to work to
advance our legislation that would secure a new 5-year MOU for
Jordan, as well as set up an enterprise fund. And I would like
to hear today about progress on both of these fronts.
I will say I am pleased to see the FMF for Israel and
assistance to the Palestinians remain relatively steady. The
support will be vital as the administration works for a lasting
peace that hopefully results in two states for two peoples.
Finally, I am deeply concerned about the idea of folding
USAID into the State Department, particularly when we hear that
40 percent of missions across the world would be closed. I am
quite certain that Congress recognizes the value that our
humanitarian, global health, and food security programs provide
to our own national security. And I understand that sometimes
cuts are necessary, and we all want the government to run more
efficiently, but simply cutting the four evaluations of the
efficiency and effectiveness of the department are completed
seems, frankly, irresponsible, especially when our national
security is at stake.
I hope today we will be able to address some of these
concerns. Appreciate your being here. And I yield back.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Mr. Deutch.
Now the members can make their opening statements. Mr.
Chabot is recognized.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this very
important hearing.
There is no shortage of crises to discuss here today. In
recent years we have witnessed chaos ensue throughout the
Middle East and much of North Africa from seemingly endless
civil war in Syria, to the scourge of ISIS, to a very flawed
deal with Iran, and on and on. And, unfortunately, the new
administration adopted a real mess.
The region has become even more complicated due to massive
immigration of refugees, and Russia's increasing engagement
there. And it just really does go on and on.
Although we may be seeing some successes, such as the Iraq
army finally reconquering Mosul; and our military taking a
number of actions to target Syrian- and Iranian-backed forces,
most notably the strike in response to Assad's use of chemical
weapons; and the shooting down of a Syrian fighter plane last
month, it appears Russia and Iranian forces will continue to
cause trouble in the region into the foreseeable future. So
that's something that has to be dealt with before the hearing
in the administration today.
Thank you for holding this hearing.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Cicilline.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Chairman Ros-Lehtinen and Ranking
Member Deutch for calling this hearing. And thank you to our
witnesses for being here to discuss the important topic of U.S.
priorities in the Middle East and North Africa for Fiscal Year
2018.
The proposed cuts that President Trump has submitted to
Congress are dangerous, short-sighted, and undermine the
important role the United States plays in supporting peace and
security in the region. It is critical that the United States
has the funds necessary to support the current complicated,
unstable conditions in the region, something the President's
proposal clearly does not take into consideration.
At a time when threats from ISIS are unrelenting, Syria
continues to face an unimaginable humanitarian and refugee
crisis, and the threat from Iran is ever looming, U.S. foreign
assistance is more important than ever. The Fiscal Year 2018
request fundamentally overlooks the threats to security and
human life that affect countries throughout the Middle East and
North Africa and America's leadership role in the world. And
many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have expressed
their concerns over the proposed cuts, both to diplomatic and
development funding.
I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses today. And
I thank you, Madam Chairman, and I yield back.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Ms. Cicilline.
Mr. Cook of California.
Mr. Cook. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
After reading this and looking at the President's budget I
am very nervous. I am on the House Armed Services Committee.
Obviously we are interested in the plus-up on some of the
military spending. But if we ignore our allies, our friends,
anything else particularly in this region, with these cuts I
think General Mattis said it, basically you are going to be
paying for more ammunition.
And so what you have to save today is extremely important.
And I think I have been very fortunate to be on both committees
because you have to work together on that. You can't solve it
with just bullets, and bombs, and everything else. That if we
don't have the money there to help these countries it is going
to be in those terms that I have described.
So thank you very much for being here. I look forward to
the hearing.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Cook.
Mr. Kinzinger.
Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all
for being here.
In case I don't get to ask questions I just wanted to make
a brief statement, which is I think not only executing the war
on terror is important, and using the funding to do that, but I
think we are forgetting about what I call the next generational
war on terror, which is the 7- and 8-year-olds of today that
are IDPs or that are in refugee camps that have denied
opportunities to get an education, or for hope, or economic
opportunity.
And with the evil dictator Assad in power and denying this
opportunity, I actually believe that Assad is the reason ISIS
exists, and he is the continued incubator for ISIS. So there
can be no defeat of radical terrorism in Syria with the
existence of this dictator continuing to foster the conditions
for this recruitment.
But when we look at things like USAID, the importance of
the State Department, and soft power exercise, I think we would
be very remiss in a few years looking back to have ignored
those tools in favor of just the military option because we
would be finding ourselves fighting another generational war on
terror.
And so with that, I will yield back.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Good point. Thank you, Mr. Kinzinger.
Mr. Schneider of Illinois.
Mr. Schneider. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
I want to thank my colleague from Illinois for his topical
comments because this is important. We are at a point in
history where we have to be looking forward and dealing not
just with the immediate threats such as ISIS but the sources of
those threats. And it is visualizing these threats that go into
the next step to stabilizing these regions, creating a future
where there is hope.
Right now we are spending a lot of effort in dealing with
people and helping people in crisis. We need to be, I believe,
able to get to a point where we can go from helping people in
crisis, helping people with good governance, with economic
development, with education. And I am very concerned, as has
already been said, that we are cutting our budget at a time
when the needs are growing. They are growing more diverse, they
are growing more complex. And as others have said, if we cut
our budget on diplomacy, if we cut our budget on development,
it is going to impact what we have to do on defense.
So, as you address these questions I look forward to
hearing your answers. And I will also echo the concern that
here we are 6 months into the year and you are still with the
titles of acting.
So, thank you. And I yield back.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Schneider.
Ms. Frankel of Florida.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you. And thank you both of you for your
service. And I apologize you have to hear our frustration.
So, the world is a dangerous place. And I, I heard that our
President said he is inheriting a mess. Well, guess what, his
budget is making a mess. That is my opinion. And his own
defense secretary said something to the effect that we can't
gain peace and security just with bombs and bullets.
And I don't know how we are going to even explain to our
military personnel or their families that have sent them to
places, I will use Iraq as an example, where we spend billions
of dollars to so-called ``win a war'' when we know a country
has to become stable eventually with development and diplomacy.
And this budget fails in that respect.
So, I hope you will be able to explain these cuts. And,
again, thank you for your service. And I yield back.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you. And thank you to all the
members. And thank you especially to our witnesses because we
will have a series of votes coming up shortly. And in the
interests of time they have agreed to not give their opening
statements. I will introduce them and then we will go right to
questions. And I will start with Mr. Chabot.
So, first, we are delighted to welcome back the Acting
Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs Bureau,
Ambassador Stuart Jones. Ambassador Jones previously served as
the United States Ambassador to Iraq and Jordan. I have had the
honor of visiting him in both countries. He is a good friend.
Prior to this he served in a variety of positions in places
like Turkey, El Salvador, Colombia, and in our mission at the
U.N. It is good to see you again, Mr. Ambassador. And
congratulations on your upcoming retirement. Thank you for your
30 years of service. And I hope that you and Barbara enjoy
retirement. Thank you for joining us today. We will look
forward to hearing your testimony--well, we will look forward
to reading your testimony and asking you questions.
And we are delighted to welcome back another good friend,
Maria Longi. Ms. Longi is USAID's Acting Assistant
Administrator of the Bureau for the Middle East. Previously she
served as the Deputy Assistant Administrator for USAID's Middle
East Bureau. And prior to joining USAID, Ms. Longi served as
the Director for Management, Policy, and Resources in the State
Department Bureau of International Organization Affairs.
So, welcome back. We look forward to you answering our
questions.
[The prepared statements of Ambassador Jones and Ms. Longi
follow:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
----------
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. And with that, we will begin the question
and answer period with Mr. Chabot of Ohio.
Mr. Chabot. Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
And the first question would be, this past weekend at the
G-20 Summit, a ceasefire was announced for portions of southern
Syria to be overseen by the United States and Russia. However,
the ceasefire only covers a small portion, as we know, of
Syria, and many details remain somewhat unclear.
Would you be so kind as to outline the terms of the
ceasefire and how we expect it to be enforced? And does the
ceasefire prevent Iran or Hezbollah from establishing a
presence in the ceasefire areas?
Ambassador Jones. Thank you, Congressman.
First, Madam Chairman, thank you for your kind words. And
thank you for your friendship and your support through these
many years. And your announcement also will be, has been a loss
for the House. So, thank you very much.
Congressman, in regards to the ceasefire that was announced
last week, this represents an agreement between the United
States, Jordan, and Russia to establish a ceasefire in the
southwestern quadrant of Syria. And the idea is, of course,
initially to establish a ceasefire, but, ultimately, to create
conditions in that area where people could start to return to
their homes, where we would be able to deliver humanitarian
assistance, and we would be able to create stability.
Certainly an essential element of that is to have no forces
threatening the line of demarcation, whether they be Syrian
Regime forces, or Iranian forces, or Hezbollah forces. So that
is certainly part of the expectation.
That said, some of the details are still to be worked out.
And we are still working through the mechanics of this. Since
the ceasefire was announced last Thursday we have seen now
several days of genuine stability and peace in that vicinity.
And just right before I got here I got a report from
Michael Ratney, our Deputy Assistant Secretary, who
participated in that negotiation. And he said that reports
today from the area around Daraa and this area where the
ceasefire has been declared that the ceasefire is holding
effectively.
So this is good news for us.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you very much.
In the past, Iran and North Korea have cooperated, as we
know, in missile development. What is the current state that we
believe of ballistic missile cooperation between Iran and North
Korea?
Ambassador Jones. Thank you again, Congressman.
So, the Iranian development of ballistic missiles we
believe is a significant threat to stability in the Middle
East. This is in complete violation of U.N. Security Council
Resolution 2231. We know that the Iranians are providing
ballistic missiles and ballistic missile technology to the
Houthis, which is adding to the conflict in Yemen.
And there are other instance, too, where the Iranians are
providing the ballistic missile technology to Hezbollah and
other terrorist organizations in the region.
I am sorry, I am not prepared to speak to you about the
nexus between North Korea and Iran. But, clearly, Iran is an
evil, is an evil partner in this arrangement.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you.
And finally, let me turn to ISIS. Obviously Mosul has just
fallen, although there are I guess a few things still to wrap
up here and there. But overall it looks like the Iraqi forces,
you know, with our assistance and others, have won out there.
And I would assume that Raqqa will be soon.
And the question is what--I assume the administration is
planning on what happens with those who either go back to their
country or go elsewhere. It will continue the terror in other
parts of the world. What is the planning going on there, to the
extent that you can tell us in an open forum?
Ambassador Jones. Well, thanks for the question again,
because it is very timely.
Today, at the State Department, we are hosting a meeting of
political directors from all the coalition members. And a key
focus of this discussion has been, what are we going to do
about the foreign fighters who are going to be now leaving the
field in Iraq and Syria?
There is a great deal of concern, as you would expect, in
Southeast Asia. I had the Deputy Prime Minister--sorry, the
Deputy Foreign Minister of Australia in my office yesterday
talking about this very topic: How can we cooperate to make
sure that we are sharing information and identifying these
foreign fighters as they cross borders and present threats to
other regions?
So this is something that is very much under our attention.
We are working closely with DoD partners. We are, of course,
focusing on terrorist finance aspects through the Department of
Treasury. This is a whole of government approach.
And, again, this is something that was highlighted during
the President's summit in Riyadh back in May. The GCC countries
and, indeed, all of the Muslim countries who attended the
broader summit pledged to support efforts to counter terrorism
financing, to counter terroristic and extremist messaging, and
also to counter the flow of foreign fighters across borders.
Mr. Chabot. Thank you. My time has expired.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you so much, Mr. Chabot.
Mr. Deutch of Florida.
Mr. Deutch. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
There has been a lot of attention on Capitol Hill paid to
the so-called Palestinian martyr payments. And we all abhor
this practice of incentivizing and rewarding terrorism.
Certainly does nothing to advance the prospects for peace that
we all desire.
I have raised this issue directly with Palestinian
Authority leaders on multiple occasions. It has been on the
agenda for President Trump and his advisors in their meetings
with President Abbas and other Palestinian officials.
Yesterday the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a
hearing on the Taylor Force Act. The legislation in its current
form would bar aid from all West Bank and Gaza programs until a
certification could be made that these payments have ceased.
Now is clearly the time for action. There is momentum in
Congress and in the administration, and many of our allies
around the world have joined in decrying these payments.
The witnesses at yesterday's hearing offered a number of
suggestions for revisions to the legislation that would ensure
that we maintain Israel's security, such as withholding PA debt
payments or setting aside the money as incentive for the PA to
retrieve it once changes to the practice are made.
Does the department have a view on these potential pass-
forwards so that the United States Congress can move ahead with
the Taylor Force Act and finally move on legislation aimed at
stopping these payments to terrorists?
Ambassador Jones. Thank you, Congressman. And also thank
you for your kind words. And I appreciated your visits to my,
to my various Embassies and very much appreciate your
friendship.
Of course the administration shares Congress' commitment to
ending the programs that incentivize acts of terrorism.
President Trump has discussed this issue directly with
President Abbas, emphasizing the need to make significant
progress on this issue. And, in fact, we have seen some
progress.
For the first time in the 52 years of the Palestinian's
Prisoner Payment Program, the Palestinian Authority cut funding
to 277 Hamas-affiliated former prisoners last month. Now that's
not sufficient. None of us think that's sufficient, but it is a
step forward. We know they have to do more.
It is not clear that the Taylor Force Act, as currently
drafted, would help accomplish the objectives that are needed.
But we--but I agree with you that the hearing yesterday was
very constructive, some interesting ideas proposed. The
administration has not yet taken a position on those proposals.
Mr. Deutch. All right. I appreciate that. I urge the
administration to look closely at some of those proposals to
see if there is a way to move forward on this quickly.
Small investments in programs like the Middle East Regional
Cooperation Program, which started over 35 years ago, which
helped foster cooperation between Israel and their Arab
neighbors, can go a long way. This particular program has never
received more than $5 million. And it brings together
researchers from across the region.
Why, at a time when the White House seems to be pushing a
regional approach to peace, would we zero out a program like
this?
Ms. Longi. Thank you for your question. And thank you for
all of your support for and words for USAID, and for
development of humanitarian assistance. We appreciate hearing
that.
The Middle East Regional Cooperation Program was zeroed
out. I will say they do some wonderful programs and there are a
significant number of grants in their pipeline. So, as a
practical matter, that program can continue for a little while.
But we do have several other cooperation programs in the
Middle East with the Israelis and Palestinians we implement
between civil society groups, between educators, between
businesses. So, while this is one of the programs where we do
have a cooperation between the different players, we do have
others that support that objective.
Mr. Deutch. I know that we do. I would also point out it is
a decision to make a small cut to a program that will
effectively be eliminated, a program that contributes to peace.
And I would urge you to reconsider that.
I am deeply concerned--I wanted to follow up on Mr.
Chabot's point--I am deeply concerned that the administration
has been willing to let Russia lead in Syria. And Russia has
shown no willingness to divorce itself from Assad, from Iran,
or from Hezbollah.
You had spoken about the current ceasefire. But I would
like to just look ahead and ask whether the United States would
ever agree to a political solution that allows a sustained
Iranian or Hezbollah military presence in Syria?
Ambassador Jones. Thank you, Congressman.
We are very troubled by the Iranian military presence, by
the Hezbollah presence in Syria. This is a significant risk and
poses a terrible threat to stability, not only in Syria but to
the entire region. So we are very troubled by that.
Our engagement with Russia is aimed at reducing the levels
of violence inside of Syria today. And so far if this ceasefire
in southwestern Syria holds, that would be a step forward in
terms of the reduction in violence and just trying to improve
people's lives at a very basic level.
In parallel, the Russians have established a process called
the Astana Process in which they are working with the Iranians
and the Turks. And they have also in that forum proposed three
other de-escalation areas to reduce the, to reduce the levels
of violence. And, indeed, since they proposed those areas we
have seen a reduction in violence in those areas.
So, we will work with the Russians if they continue to be
able to help us reduce the levels of violence in these areas.
Hopefully, as we reduce areas of violence we can create greater
levels of stability, we can provide more humanitarian
assistance. And then the idea is to move toward a political
process. And we hope that that political process will remove
Bashar al-Assad.
Mr. Deutch. Well, I understand. Let me just be clear
though. And I understand the step-by-step approach. But my
question was about a political solution, about a long-term
plan.
And I would suggest to you, respectfully, that the idea
that there can be stability in Syria with a permanent presence
of Iran and Hezbollah is not a serious one. And that is what I
am suggesting.
Ambassador Jones. And I am sorry, I should have, I should
have said that I agree with you. We agree. We agree on this
point. There cannot be stability in Syria as long as Iran and
Hezbollah maintain this current military presence. That is our
position as well.
Mr. Deutch. I appreciate it, Mr. Ambassador. Thank you
both.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Deutch. Thank you.
Mr. Cook of California.
Mr. Cook. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
My questions are about there is a whole laundry list of
countries here that we could address, but let me start off with
there are two I want to talk about: Bahrain and the huge cut in
a country where, obviously, our military, the fleet is
stationed right there. Anyone who has ever gone there they know
how important that is.
And then you have the situation with a government that is
primarily Sunni with the majority of the population Shia. And I
am afraid that is on the at least my watch list for future
problems from Iran and what have you. And could you comment on
that situation?
And, of course, to see that cut there it like, wait a
minute, does anybody know what is going on? And whether you
share my angst in that regard.
Ambassador Jones. Thank you, Congressman.
We, we certainly agree that Bahrain is an important
security partner for the United States. It is the base of the
6th Fleet. It is an important partner in the coalition against
ISIS. It is playing a role in the Saudi-led coalition on Yemen.
We have important security interests and investments in
Bahrain.
Bahrain also faces tremendous security challenges. I was
there recently in March and I met with the Minister of
Interior. He told me that in the last year he had lost 50
police officers to Iranian-sponsored terrorism in Bahrain. So,
we need to stand by Bahrain.
Again, we will have this regional--sorry--this global
foreign military financing fund where we will have the
flexibility to support our partners as needed going forward.
The Pentagon will also have funds, counter-ISIS funds through
which they can support programs in Bahrain.
And, also, to a great degree Bahrain can support its own
security. And it also receives significant support from its
Gulf partners. So I am confident that there will be no gaps in
our approach to Bahrain.
We are concerned about human rights in Bahrain. But this
administration has de-linked the conversation on human rights
to our security support. We are still talking about human
rights. We are very concerned about the arrest of dissidents
and the lack of due process, but we have de-linked that from
the important security support that you mentioned.
Mr. Cook. Thank you. The other country I wanted to talk
about was Tunisia. You know, I look at the figures for Libya
and I understand that. But Tunisia, you know, where the Arab
Spring and everything like that, where it all started, and that
was a year, 2 years ago. And saw the remnants where they shot
up the museum and things like that.
More telling, at least from an economic standpoint, and all
the beach resorts and the cruise ships that are now in Croatia,
or what have you, and the whole economy is, is just basically
hurting. And it is very, very worried about that country.
In this, my thoughts on this were reinforced. I was just in
Italy a few months ago, and the Italians are very worried about
the human trafficking coming from sub-Saharan Africa, through
Libya, through Tunisian, some of those countries that are, you
know, landing every night there.
And that is going to be basically the same question: Do you
share my same anxiety about that country where in many ways
that was our hope for the future for the Arab region?
Ambassador Jones. Thank you, Congressman.
As you say, Tunisia is an important partner for the United
States. Prime Minister Chahed was here this week. He met with
the Vice President. He met with Secretary of Defense, Secretary
of Treasury. The Tunisians have been doing a terrific job. They
are building democratic institutions. They are defeating ISIS.
They definitely merit our support.
I think this budget reflects significant support for
Tunisia. We straight lined our economic support funds with the
exception of just $20 million. That reflects the fact that we
have paid up the Enterprise Fund commitment in Tunisia. And the
Enterprise Fund is succeeding in Tunisia.
We also, thanks to the support of Congress, were able to
provide $40 million in supplemental FY 2017 funds in counter-
ISIS funds to Tunisia. Thirty million of that is FMF. So that
is money that will be going into the system relatively soon.
As the chairman mentioned, although we have not--this
budget does not provide for FMF in FY 2018, Tunisia will be a
higher priority recipient under the global FMF fund, $200
million FMF fund. I think all of us recognize the principles
that you have outlined, that we need to stand with Tunisia.
Let me just say very quickly, too, Tunisia will also
continue to qualify for DoD 333 funds, also DoD CTEF funds.
And, also, Tunisia is now the beneficiary of a MCC, Millennium
Challenge Corporation, compact agreement which will bring a
significant U.S. investment, multi-hundred million dollar
investment in infrastructure into Tunisia.
So, I think we can say we are standing by the Tunisians.
Mr. Cook. Thank you very much. I yield back.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Cook.
And before I recognize Mr. Cicilline, we are going to be
cutting the time for Q&A to 4 minutes because we want to give
as many members the opportunity to ask questions before the
votes are called.
Mr. Cicilline is recognized.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you to our
witnesses, and not only for your service but for the service of
the men and women you represent. And I regret that we are
living in a time where there is such an absence of leadership
in important positions in both your agencies.
But I want to just quickly move to my questions. First is,
ISIS control over Syrian land has drastically reduced over the
past year, particularly of course in the northern part of the
country. How does the budget that is being presented today
support the humanitarian aid which will be necessary to promote
stability in these areas?
And what can we do, and what does the budget support to
ensure that these areas are not taken advantage of by new and
different extremist groups going forward?
Ms. Longi. Thank you for your question.
I can start on the humanitarian and development support
that we provide through this budget, primarily in Iraq and
Syria, which is where the issues are most prominent right now.
I think the request on the humanitarian account will continue
to support the needs that we are seeing in both Iraq and Syria.
Just this week, we announced another $190 million for the
humanitarian crisis in Syria. So, we will continue to support
that issue.
In Syria, the U.S. Government has already provided over $6
billion since the Syria crisis began on the humanitarian front.
And as with Iraq, we have requested sufficient funds, we
believe, to continue to support those needs.
For the request on the stabilization front, we are
anticipating that those needs will be great. The estimates that
we are hearing from Mosul just this week with the coalition in
town are upwards of $1 billion. We just announced the
contribution of $150 million to the UNDP stabilization fund
there. And so we are working very hard to encourage other,
other coalition partners to contribute as well. And, hopefully,
we will be successful on that front because they are already
seeing returnees because of some of the stabilization efforts
that they have made.
In Syria for the stabilization effort, we have requested
funding in our budget for that. The landscape is unknown for a
lot of that now. But I think our goal, and what we are
discussing with our coalition partners, is focusing on
stabilization once areas are liberated. And so, we are all
working to tee up partners to do that work and funding.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you.
As Iran and North Korea are enhancing their abilities to
disrupt military communications and navigation in order to
degrade information networks, does the Fiscal Year 2018 budget
propose enough spending to fight this global threat of
electronic warfare by two of our most serious adversaries?
Ms. Longi. Could you repeat that?
Mr. Cicilline. Sure. They are, both North Korea and Iran
are enhancing their capabilities to disrupt military
communications and navigation in order to degrade information
networks. And does the Fiscal Year 2018 budget propose enough
spending to fight the looming global threat that these
adversaries present through electronic warfare?
Ambassador Jones. So, I apologize, Congressman. I am not
well prepared on what we are doing on electronic warfare. Those
activities wouldn't come out of the NEA budget. But I can
assure you that this is a topic of frequent discussion in the
inter-agency, and both the Pentagon, our intelligence services,
and others are looking at these issues and are preparing
approaches.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you.
And my final question. According to Freedom House, freedom
in the world has been in decline over the last decade. The
President's request for democracy rights and governance is down
to $1.5 billion, a reduction in more than $700 million, and 30
percent compared to the $2.3 billion appropriated by Congress
in Fiscal Years 2016 and 2017.
And my question is how does the President's request, that
dramatic reduction, reflect our country's commitment to
democracy, human rights, and good governance at a time when the
threat of instability, violent extremism, and tolerance, and
authoritarianism seem to threaten more and more people around
the world? It seems as if we are retreating from that work by
this very substantial reduction in this budget proposal. And I
would like to hear your response to that, please.
Ms. Longi. Thank you. I can say from USAID's perspective
that democracy and human rights is no less of an emphasis for
us as we go forward.
Mr. Cicilline. I understand. But can you do the work that
is necessary with a 30 percent reduction?
Ms. Longi. In the Middle East region, we have not requested
a 30 percent reduction so, hopefully, we are confident that the
funds that are there will allow us to do what we are able to do
in these countries. As you acknowledged, that space is getting
tighter and it makes it more difficult, which makes it tough to
kind of up our game on the diplomacy and the conversation part
with the countries, but I think assistance-wise we have
sufficient funds to do that.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. And we regret that votes have
just been called. We have 11 votes. But I think that we will be
able to get in Mr. Kinzinger and Ms. Frankel's question, and
I--questions, and I would ask the members to submit the other
ones, their questions in writing.
Mr. Kinzinger.
Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you, Madam Chair. And, again, thank
you all for being here.
I was actually watching a cable news show yesterday, and
that is not one I usually watch, and there was a respected
scholar Max Boot on it. And in that exchange with this cable
news host, this cable news host was talking about basically how
wonderful it would be to work with the Russians in the Middle
East and how, you know, the Iranians actually aren't really all
that bad, and said that, you know, there was no terrorist
attack by the Iranians against Americans in the United States.
Although Mr. Boot reminded him that there are about 900 dead
Americans from Iraq as a result of Iranian involvement and
influence.
And I say all that to say there is this kind of like really
kind of sick narrative out there that we no longer need to
fight for values, and human rights, and beliefs, and freedom,
which is very counter to President Reagan, that, you know, I
became a Republican because of. And now it is this idea that we
lean again on strongmen, and that dictators can keep order in
the Middle East, and that somehow repressing human desires is
possible, even in the age of technology when people can
communicate and come together.
I think, you know, when you make the case on Syria for
instance, people often point to Libya as a disastrous result.
And there is huge challenges in Libya. I would argue that it
was our leaving Libya afterwards that has been a big problem.
But if I compare Libya to Syria, there is no comparison in
terms of which is the bigger tragedy. In Syria there was no
intervention; Libya there was intervention. Much different of a
situation.
I say all that to ask this: Instead of relying on other
countries and encouraging them to use military hard power to
oppress humans, and bomb hospitals, and kill 500,000 Syrians in
this case, as I mentioned in my opening statement, it is about
winning over the next generation. We are engaged in a war that
is going to take as long or longer than the Cold War. The Cold
War was won not because we had a great military--we did--but it
was won because multiple generations began to reject the
philosophy of communism and desire more. That is what is going
to have to happen in this fight.
So I guess the question for both of you is, when we talk
about the next generational war on terror, we talk about the
budget request, we talk about giving people hope and
opportunity, not all just us, but working and leveraging our
allies and partners in the region together, do we have
sufficient enough resources and strategy to engage in that
understanding that this is a long-term fight, when ISIS' flag
falls there is still going to be this ideology and see this
through to the end?
I will start with you, Ambassador.
Ambassador Jones. Well, thank you, Congressman.
And I think if we look at what happened in May, the Riyadh
Summit where the President met first with the Saudis and then
with the GCC and then with the broader Islamic community, and
in all of those sessions they mutually agreed to fight
extremism, to counter extremism, to defeat terrorism, and also
to stand up against the malign Iranian influence that is
destabilizing the region, that has caused so many deaths and
destruction in Syria.
So I think that the Riyadh Summit was an historic event.
And I think it is important to look at what came out of those
meetings. And that has created a platform for this
administration to move forward.
In the GCC, although there has been this falling out with
Qatar, we still have a document that creates a platform for
both counterterrorism and counter-extremism cooperation, but
also security cooperation throughout the region, blunting the
malign influence of Iran, and working together to build those
economies.
As you know, one of the deliverables from the President's
visit to Riyadh was the establishment of the ETIDAL Center for
Counter-Extremism in Riyadh. The director of the center is here
this week; he has been meeting with U.S. Government officials
all week. He is taking back new ideas. And this is not just
about stopping negative messages in the cybersphere, this is
about addressing the core issues that you have raised in your
question.
So I think it is exactly where we are.
Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you.
Ambassador Jones. Sorry.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you.
Mr. Kinzinger. Thank you.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Excellent question. Thank you for the
answer.
Ms. Frankel of Florida.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Let me start by saying that the ignorance of the State
Department budget is appalling and frightening. We are
withdrawing from the world at a time when our leadership is
needed more than ever. And buddying up with Vladimir Putin is
not a substitute for a well thought out plan for peace and
security.
I am not going to ask you any questions because you are
here to defend what I think is the indefensible. And I think
you two are just very fine public servants. And I don't want to
do that.
So I am going to yield to Mr., the rest of my time to Mr.
Schneider who wants to take a shot at asking you a question.
Mr. Schneider. Thank you. I appreciate the moments. And I
appreciate your service to our country and you being here to
discuss.
Two things. One, what was spoken about earlier with the
ceasefire negotiated in southwestern Syria and the idea of the
presence of Iran, Iranian troops, Hezbollah troops there, are
you aware, this ceasefire I assume includes Daraa where this
started. And I don't know how we can have a process that is
going to lead to peace by having the same people who have
oppressed an entire nation because 15 young children spoke out
against the government, and yet there it is. It includes the
area to the west of Daraa along the Damascus-Amman Highway,
which not only borders Jordan but borders Israel. And the idea
of Iranian troops, the possibility of them ever being there is
of grave concern.
So I guess that is a statement more than a question.
My question is budgets reflect our values, they reflect our
goals, they ultimately, in theory, should reflect our strategy.
It seems to me that this budget is a budget developed first
with numbers, and then we will see if the strategy follows.
So to each of you, given the draconian cuts, I will argue
indefensible, unwise, misguided cuts of this budget, what
impacts is that going to have on A) the ability to achieve our
goals; are we changing our goals, and B) the strategy that
follows to achieve those goals?
Ms. Longi. Yes, thank you.
I think that the budget for the Middle East is reflective
and supportive of our goals. I am not going to speak to the
military piece of it. But on the development and stabilization
piece, I do think that we have asked for sufficient resources
to support what our goals are. And those include defeating ISIS
and stabilizing the regions afterwards, as well as the longer-
term development goals in the countries such as Jordan and
Egypt, in countries where there is more stability and the
ability to do that.
Mr. Schneider. And if I may, I am sorry to interject, but
because of time.
Defeating ISIS is critical. We have to defeat ISIS. It is a
milestone, it is not the endpost. The endpost is a region that
is stable, a region that is not a threat to the countries
around it, and to the United States.
Ms. Longi. And I will just add on that in our strategic
planning and thinking about the assistance, how we spend the
assistance in these countries, we do look longer-term to the
development impacts. And so, we are not just doing the
immediate stabilization work, we are looking at primary
education, and jobs creation, and things that do have a longer-
term impact.
Mr. Schneider. I guess, Ambassador Jones, put you on the
spot. And I with you great happiness in your retirement. We
will miss you.
But as you look back on your career, the budget being
proposed is it going to make your successors, and those who
come, the men and women who put their lives on the line day in
and day out working on behalf of our nation as diplomats in
development, is their job going to be easier or is it going to
be more difficult?
Ambassador Jones. Thank you for your kind words.
So speaking for NEA, speaking for the Middle East Bureau,
we, we are looking at an 11 percent cut here. I think we have
been able to digest these cuts. Clearly, I think there is
concern about the zeroing out of some of the foreign military
financing accounts. We will look at how to address that through
the $200 million FMF Global Fund.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. Thank you,
Brad.
Ambassador Jones. Thank you.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. I know that your wife, Barbara, is
itching to have you leave as well.
Ambassador Jones. Thank you.
Ms. Ros-Lehtinen. But we have 2 minutes left to vote. And
with that, the subcommittee is adjourned.
Thank you for your testimony. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 2:13 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]